cpu_list_my_lots

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 mentions authentication ('Requires a session') and the scope of results ('across all lifecycle states'). However, it does not disclose whether results are paginated, sorted, or limited, nor any side effects. For a list operation, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences with no redundant words. Front-loaded with the core action, followed by optional filter and use case. Every sentence contributes to understanding.

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 and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, prerequisite, and use case. However, it omits the structure of the returned data (e.g., each lot object fields), which could be useful but is not critical given the simplicity.

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 input schema provides full description for the single parameter 'state' (enum values and default). The tool description adds usage context ('track create / cancel progress') but doesn't enhance parameter semantics beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the action: 'List the lots you have created'. It specifies scope ('across all lifecycle states') and optional filtering by state. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cpu_list_lots, which likely lists all lots, not just user's.

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 description provides a use case: 'Use this to find your lotIds and track create / cancel progress.' It also notes a prerequisite ('Requires a session'). While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, the context of sibling tools implies it's for personal lots. Slight gap in excluding when not to use.

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