List Actor runs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose ordering and session/recency scoping, but it does not describe pagination/truncation behavior, auth requirements, or what the returned list contains; 'list' does weakly imply a read-only 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 entire description is one short sentence that front-loads the action and immediately gives the key constraints (recent, session-scoped, newest first). There is no redundant or filler text.

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 one-parameter list tool this is mostly complete: it states scope, ordering, and resource. The main gap is that with no output schema, the agent is not told what fields each run entry will contain, though 'list' makes the general return shape predictable.

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?

With schema_description_coverage at 0%, the description needed to compensate by explaining the 'limit' parameter, but it does not mention it at all. The schema's default/min/max provide some information, yet no semantic meaning is added by the prose.

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 names a specific action ('List'), resource ('Actor runs'), and scope ('recent... in this server session') plus ordering ('newest first'). This clearly tells an agent what the tool does and how it differs from singular tools like get-actor-run.

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 phrasing implies this is for browsing recent runs rather than querying or fetching a specific run, but it never explicitly names alternatives such as search-actors or get-actor-run. No when-not conditions are given, leaving the routing decision somewhat to inference.

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