list_status_updates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation through the verb 'List' but does not state whether authentication is needed, how pagination works beyond the schema's 'limit' parameter, what the return shape looks like, or whether the result is sorted.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, which is appropriate for a simple list tool. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to gaps addressed in other dimensions rather than being a structural flaw itself.

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 a fully documented schema and no output schema, the bare description is minimally functional. However, it omits any differentiation from 'search_status_updates' and provides no behavioral or usage context, leaving the agent with avoidable ambiguity when choosing between sibling tools.

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%, so all four parameters (tag, limit, status_type, related_entity_id) are already documented in the schema. The description's only parameter-related phrase, 'with optional filters', adds no meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the 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 states a clear verb ('List') and resource ('status updates'), making the operation immediately understandable. It does not, however, distinguish this tool from the sibling 'search_status_updates', leaving the agent to guess which listing tool fits a given need.

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 phrase 'with optional filters' hints at how to narrow results, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus 'search_status_updates' or the other status-update siblings. No exclusions, prerequisites, or recommended contexts are provided.

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