get_all_pending

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses key behaviors: it returns metadata fields (comment, element, URL, severity), excludes screenshots, and focuses on unresolved annotations. While it doesn't cover every conceivable detail like pagination or permissions, it gives a clear behavioral contract for a simple read-only 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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately followed by return-value details and an exclusion with an alternative. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or irrelevant information.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description is quite complete, listing the returned metadata fields and explicitly noting the absence of screenshot data. It could theoretically add details like sorting or global scope, but for a straightforward listing action, it covers the essential information needed by an agent.

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 has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty, so there is no parameter detail to explain. Per the baseline for 0-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description adds no parametric information, but none is required.

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 retrieves all pending (unresolved) annotations from the UI, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_screenshot by explicitly noting it excludes screenshot data, making its unique purpose obvious.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool (when needing annotation metadata) and when not to (when needing screenshots), naming the alternative get_screenshot. This covers the primary use case decision and sets expectations for users.

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