List task runs

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety profile is clear. The description adds non-obvious operational context beyond the schema: the 24-hour default window, the 7-day max range, the 2023-01-01 floor, and especially the 2026-10-01 default change from 7 days to 24 hours. These are the kind of behavioral traits an agent can't derive from structured fields.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and scope, then a clearly delineated Note for time-window rules and a final example of multi-value filtering. Well-structured; slightly long, but each block carries distinct information.

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 an output schema exists (so return shape need not be explained) and annotations cover the read-only safety profile, the description fills the remaining gaps: default time window, historical default change, max range, and multi-value filter syntax. An agent has enough to call it 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 already 100%, and the schema documents page_size, include_superseded, time bounds, and ID filters fully. The description adds the comma-separated multi-value semantics for status and integration (useful, since the schema only says 'where the parameter accepts multiple values'), but otherwise mostly restates schema-defined behavior. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema already carries the load.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('retrieve a paginated list of task runs') and scopes it to the workspace the credential resolves to. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling 'list_task_runs_for_pipeline_run', so a reader must infer the distinction from context.

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 explains when default behavior applies (last 24 hours if no time range is given), the 7-day maximum window when both bounds are set, and the explicit recommendation to pass time_from/time_to to control the window. It does not, however, name when to use this tool instead of the pipeline-run-scoped variant.

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