list_focus

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does disclose one meaningful trait — that the tool only works in API-token mode — but says nothing about read-only nature, pagination, date scoping, or what subset of focus records is returned.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler and the core purpose front-loaded. It is efficient, though the second sentence is doing only minimal work and more behavioral detail could have been added without bloat.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but thin: it never indicates the shape or scope of what is returned (e.g. all focus sessions, filtering behavior). An agent can invoke it but knows little about the result.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline a 4 is appropriate. There is no parameter surface for the description to clarify or compensate for.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Lists focus (pomodoro) records', which clearly separates it from the sibling create_focus. It does not explicitly name or differentiate against other list_* siblings, but the resource is unambiguous.

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 phrase 'API-token mode only' tells the agent a precondition for the tool to work, which is real guidance. However, there is no statement of when to use this versus alternatives (e.g. list_tasks, list_habits) or any exclusion criteria beyond the auth-mode constraint.

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