get_journeys_for_release

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List recorded journeys' without indicating whether this is purely read-only, what data it returns, or if any setup (e.g., a release brief) is required. The phrasing implies no side effects but does not explicitly state them.

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 short sentence with no redundant words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. However, it is so brief that it under-specifies essential information, so it is not a perfect fit, but it earns a 4 for efficient use of words.

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 tool with two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide substantial context about what 'recorded journeys' are, the role of each parameter, and the expected result. The current text is too vague and incomplete, leaving the agent uncertain about how to use the tool correctly.

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%, so the description must explain the parameters. It mentions 'app_url' (albeit unclearly as 'release brief app_url or explicit app_url') but completely omits the 'release_id' parameter, which appears in the schema. This leaves a key parameter unexplained and hinders correct invocation.

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 a verb ('List') and a resource ('recorded journeys'), but the distinguishing filter 'release brief app_url or explicit app_url' is ambiguous and does not clarify how this differs from sibling tools like get_release_and_journeys. The purpose is clear at a basic level but lacks specificity and differentiation.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_release_and_journeys or discover_critical_journeys. The description provides no situational context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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