veo_list_generations

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'List all...' which implies a read-only operation and mentions 'current status' as output, but it does not explicitly note that it is non-destructive, nor does it mention any side effects, permissions, or limitations. The addition of 'subprocess-based' gives some context but not enough to rate higher.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, with the primary action front-loaded in the first sentence. No filler or redundant information is present.

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 tool is simple with one well-documented parameter and an output schema. The description clarifies what is listed (all subprocess-based generation sessions) and that status is shown. However, it lacks a note distinguishing it from the similar sibling veo_list_sessions, which would improve completeness.

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 provides a full description for the only parameter, active_only, so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add any parameter semantics beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'video generation sessions', further specifying 'subprocess-based generation sessions' which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like veo_list_sessions and veo_check_generation.

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?

No explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as veo_list_sessions or veo_check_generation. The intended usage is only implied by the name and the act of listing sessions.

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