meah_list_agentsLists every worker known to the MEAH process, optionally filtered by lifecycle state (queued, running, succeeded, failed, cancelled, timed_out).
List every worker known to this MEAH process, optionally filtered by lifecycle state.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| state | No | Filter by lifecycle state. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the scope ('every worker known to this MEAH process') but does not disclose return format, pagination, authentication, or rate limits, leaving some behavioral gaps.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence that states the action, scope, and optional filter with no wasted words. Well-sized for a simple list tool.
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 operation with full schema coverage and safe-read annotations, the description provides enough to invoke correctly. It omits return shape or pagination details, but given the tool's low complexity and the absence of an output schema, the omission is minor.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% and the single optional enum parameter is documented in the schema as 'Filter by lifecycle state.' The description repeats this without adding syntax, default, or behavioral detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 ('List') and resource ('every worker known to this MEAH process'), making the scope and operation clear. It does not explicitly name or differentiate from sibling tools like get_agent or list_models, so it falls short of a 5.
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?
Mentions the optional lifecycle-state filter, which implies when the filter is useful, but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling list or get tools. Usage is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.