opencode_list_runs

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows it's safe. The description adds the return format and an example, which provides some behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not describe any edge cases, pagination details, or error behavior.

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 very concise, with a one-sentence purpose, a return format block, and an example. Each section adds value and the structure is clear.

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 list tool with one optional parameter, the description covers the purpose, return format, and usage example. The existing annotations and schema fill in safety and parameter bounds. Minor details like the exact meaning of 'recent' are unspecified, but overall completeness is high.

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 single parameter 'limit' is fully described in the schema with default, min, max, and description. The description's example (opencode_list_runs(limit=20)) adds no additional semantic value. Baseline 3 applies since schema coverage is 100%.

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 clearly states it lists all recent agent runs with status and exit codes, which is a specific action and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like opencode_runs or opencode_get_run_status, but the name and description are clear enough.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as opencode_get_run_status or opencode_runs. The description and example imply it's for fetching a list, but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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