capture_list

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

Annotations already mark the operation as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds value beyond annotations by explaining that terminal-error sessions are included and that stream_state may use a 'stopped:' prefix, giving the agent useful expectation about result contents.

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 front-loads the core purpose and appends only the one important behavioral nuance. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 zero-parameter list operation with an output schema and read-only annotations, the key semantics are covered: what is listed and the notable inclusion rule. Ordering or pagination details are not mentioned, but those are likely represented in the output schema and are secondary for such a simple tool.

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 has no parameters and the description correctly adds none. With zero parameters, the baseline of 4 applies because there is no parameter meaning that needs clarification.

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 specific verb and resource ('List capture sessions') and adds a distinctive inclusion detail (sessions stopped by a terminal error). This makes it easy to distinguish from sibling capture_start, capture_read, and capture_stop operations.

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 clearly frames this as the listing operation for capture sessions, which is the natural use case. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name an alternative list tool, but there is no competing capture_get/list sibling, so the context is clear enough.

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