List run documents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool lists documents and returns specific fields, implying it is read-only, but it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, authentication needs, or pagination. The disclosure is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 a single sentence of 12 words, front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by parenthetical field list. No unnecessary information, 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (1 param, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core functionality and return fields. It does not mention that the run must exist or that the result may be an empty array, but these are minor omissions.

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%. The description does not explain the runId parameter beyond the tool's purpose. Although the parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, the description should clarify that runId is the identifier of the run whose documents are listed. This is a gap.

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 states the verb 'list' and the resource 'documents generated by a run', and specifies the fields returned (title, format, folderPath, status). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_runs (lists runs) and get_document_url (gets a single document URL).

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 context is clear: use this tool to list documents for a specific run. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but the sibling set implies differentiation. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, but the purpose is straightforward.

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