list_experiment_spans

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the transparency burden. 'List all spans' clearly implies a read-only, non-mutating operation, but the description does not disclose potential pagination, ordering, return shape, or whether nested spans are included. These gaps are notable for a listing tool, but the verb itself communicates a low-risk operation.

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 focused sentence with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the action and object, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 simple one-parameter list tool, the description is largely complete: it states the action, the resource, and the required scope. While it omits output details and pagination behavior, the absence of an output schema and the low tool complexity make this acceptable.

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?

There is only one parameter, experiment_id, and the schema already fully describes it as a unique experiment identifier from list_experiments. The description only restates the experiment scoping and adds no additional syntactic, format, or relationship details beyond the schema.

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'), identifies the resource ('all spans'), and scopes it to a particular experiment. The parenthetical '(execution traces)' clarifies the domain and distinguishes this from singular tools like get_experiment_span or related tools like list_traces.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving all spans belonging to one experiment, which provides useful context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives like get_experiment_span or get_spans_summary, nor does it state any exclusions or conditions.

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