List authorized launches

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description does add one genuinely non-redundant fact — the API-key requirement — but says nothing about what "launch" data is returned or how large the result can get, and no output schema exists to fill that gap.

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 short sentences with the prerequisite front-loaded and no padding. The second sentence is vague, but the problem is the content's informativeness rather than bloat, so length is appropriate.

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 zero parameters and rich annotations, the structural burden is low, but the description still fails to say what a launch record contains or what an agent should expect back, and there is no output schema to compensate. The auth note helps, but the core return semantics remain unexplained.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless schema applies. No misleading parameter guidance is present.

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 never actually states that this lists launches; "Read durable execution and provider result states" is jargon that restates neither a clear verb+resource pair nor maps onto the tool name. The only hint of scope comes from the title, which is a separate field, so on its own the sentence is close to tautological.

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?

"Requires API key" is an auth prerequisite, not usage guidance. There is no statement of when to call this vs. siblings like get_launch or list_directories, and no conditions or exclusions are given, so the agent must infer selection from the tool name alone.

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