List solves

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two genuine traits beyond that — the results are account-scoped ('your') and ordered newest first — but says nothing about pagination behaviour or result size, which matter for a list endpoint.

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 that front-loads the verb and resource and appends the ordering constraint. Nothing is wasted and nothing essential is buried.

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, fully-documented, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description plus schema covers what an agent needs to invoke it. The only gap is pagination guidance, which the schema's starting_after description largely supplies.

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 100%, so all four parameters (type, limit, status, starting_after) are already documented in the schema, including enum meanings and paging semantics. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the implicit newest-first ordering, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List your recent solves') and the sort order, which distinguishes it clearly from the sibling get_solve. It stops short of naming siblings or scope boundaries, but the read/list purpose is 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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is for browsing recent solves, and the presence of 'starting_after' signals pagination, but the description never says when to use this versus get_solve or how paging works. No exclusions or alternatives are stated.

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