List BotArmor audits

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description's main added value is the ordering guarantee ('newest first') and the fields present on each item. It does not say what 'latest' means in scope (e.g. per-workspace, all-time) or whether results are truncated beyond the limit.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the resource and scope, followed by ordering and return fields. Nothing is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description helpfully enumerates the salient returned fields (status, grade, score) and ordering, which is enough to call the tool correctly. A brief note distinguishing it from get_audit_report would close the remaining gap.

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 limit parameter is documented at 100% schema coverage including its default and bounds, so the schema carries the burden. The description adds nothing about the limit, not even how the default of 10 interacts with 'latest'.

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 the specific resource (BotArmor audits), the scope (the user's latest) and the ordering (newest first), plus the key fields returned (status, grade, score). It is clear what the tool does, but it never mentions the sibling tools (get_audit_status, get_audit_report) that overlap with the 'status/grade' data it returns.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the browse/discovery call for recent audits. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_audit_status or get_audit_report, and no statement about prerequisites or when the list would be empty.

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