list_detections

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

No annotations; description only says 'List' (implying read-only) but omits details on pagination, rate limits, permissions, or response behavior. More context is needed for a read operation.

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 efficient sentences: first states purpose and filter criteria, second provides a concrete list of detection IDs. No redundancy.

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?

Covers purpose and parameter hints well, but lacks context on default status, tenantWide scope, response structure, and behavioral details like pagination. Reasonable for a list tool but could be improved.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3, but the description adds value by listing common detection IDs, enhancing understanding beyond the schema's generic description.

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 tool lists Harden-Runner detections with filtering, and the provided common detection IDs help distinguish from more specific sibling tools like list_imposter_commit_detections.

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 implies usage for general detection listing via common IDs, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs. specific sibling tools like list_imposter_commit_detections.

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