List Requests

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List requests.' reveals nothing about read-only safety, pagination, filtering, permissions, or result format, despite significant behavioral implications from the nested list_info parameter.

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 two-word description is extremely short but under-specified rather than concise. It is front-loaded yet fails to provide even the minimum structure needed for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 the nested parameter structure, no annotations, no output schema, and the presence of many sibling tools, the description is completely inadequate. An agent cannot determine how to invoke the tool correctly or what to expect from it.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and only one top-level parameter, list_info, whose many nested properties (row_count, sort_field, search_criteria, etc.) are entirely undocumented. The description adds no meaning or usage hints for any parameter.

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 clear verb ('List') and resource ('requests'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_request, update_request, and get_request. However, it offers no further differentiation among the many list_* siblings or any scope details.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_request, list_request_notes, or other list_* tools. The description only names the operation and leaves context entirely unstated.

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