list_requests

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

With no annotations provided, the description must cover behavioral traits. It states the ordering and precondition, but does not disclose error behaviors (e.g., if capture is not enabled), authentication needs, rate limits, or output structure. This is adequate for a simple read tool but lacks depth.

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 that efficiently conveys action, resource, ordering, and precondition. No redundant words, well front-loaded.

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?

The description lacks information about the return value or output format since no output schema is provided. For a list tool, users would benefit from knowing what fields are returned. However, the input schema and precondition are covered.

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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (subdomain, limit) with 100% coverage. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'list' and the resource 'captured HTTP requests for a subdomain', with additional context of ordering (newest first) and a precondition. It is distinct from sibling tools which deal with subdomain management, DNS records, and domains.

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 mentions a precondition ('requires capture to be enabled') but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus siblings like 'toggle_capture' or 'list_subdomains'. The usage context is implied but not expanded with when-not or alternatives.

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