List Pending Operations

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: operations expire after 30 minutes, and 'pending' is defined as awaiting preview or execution. This gives the agent a clearer model of what the list contains.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the core function, and the second adds the essential caveat about expiry. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list operation with strong annotations and full schema coverage, the description is mostly complete. It clarifies scope and expiry, and the response format is handled by the schema. However, since there is no output schema, it could have mentioned what fields are returned or whether the list is ordered, but that is not critical for a list tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The only parameter, response_format, is fully described in the schema with enum values, a default, and a description. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level information, so it relies entirely on the schema's 100% coverage. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the tool as listing pending operations, with a specific scope ('waiting for preview or execution'). This distinguishes it from siblings like operation_status (which checks specific operations) and operation_cancel (which cancels them). The verb 'List' and resource 'pending operations' are unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies when to use this tool: when you need to see operations awaiting preview or execution. It adds the 30-minute expiry context, which is useful for monitoring urgency. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like operation_status or operation_cancel, so it lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.