list_missions

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true. The description adds tenant scoping and filtering options, which are useful but not significantly beyond what the annotations and schema convey. No contradictions found.

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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a structured list of parameters. It avoids unnecessary verbosity, though could be slightly more structured with parameter formatting.

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 presence of an output schema and simple optional parameters, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, tenant scope, and parameter details, but omits mention of default behavior (e.g., returns all missions when no filters) or pagination hints.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description lists all three parameters with clear explanations: 'Filter by agent', 'Filter by status (queued, running, paused, completed, failed)', and 'Max results'. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema.

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 'List missions for the current tenant' with a specific verb and resource. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like create_mission, get_mission, or delete_mission, providing clear 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?

The description implies usage for retrieving missions but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or comparisons with alternatives. No mention of when not to use it or how it differs from other list tools, resulting in adequate but not exceptional guidance.

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