recording_list

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It states the tool only returns in-progress recordings, implying it is read-only and non-destructive. It could further mention no side effects, but the current description is sufficient for a lightweight peek.

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 very concise: two sentences with a clear front-loaded purpose and a line for alternatives. No wasted words.

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?

Given zero parameters and an output schema (implied), the description fully covers the tool's purpose, usage guidance, and limitations. It leaves no obvious gaps for an agent to misuse.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the baseline score is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details, and the schema coverage is 100%.

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 recordings that are currently in progress, using a specific verb ('list') and resource ('recordings'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like recording_start, recording_end, and the resource for ended recordings.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool (lost track of in-flight recording_id, check for open sessions) and when not to (for ended recordings, use synpareia://recordings). It provides clear context and alternatives.

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