list_execution_jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered structurally. The description does add one useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations: results omit the sensitive dispatch_token. It says nothing about default limits, pagination, or ordering.

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?

A single short sentence with the operation front-loaded and no padding. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than purposeful concision.

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 three-parameter list tool with no output schema and zero schema documentation, the description should explain the filters and return shape. As written, an agent knows only that jobs are listed without dispatch_token, which is insufficient to call the tool confidently with filters.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for all three parameters (limit, status, task_id), and the description adds no semantics for any of them. It mentions dispatch_token, which is an output field, not a documented input, so it does not compensate for the parameter gap at all.

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 states a clear verb+resource ("List execution jobs") and scopes it with "(without dispatch_token)", which tells the agent the token field is excluded from results. It is distinguishable from the singular sibling get_execution_job only by the list-vs-get verb; the description never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus get_execution_job, nor any mention of filtering by status or task_id, even though those parameters exist. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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