list_changesets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the behavioral constraint 'requires SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true', which is not covered by annotations. This provides additional safety information beyond the structured fields.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It includes a crucial prerequisite without extra words, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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 that this is a simple list operation with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly adequate. It covers the purpose and a key prerequisite. However, it could briefly mention that results can be filtered by state (as per schema) or that it returns a list of changesets, but the current level is sufficient for a low-complexity tool.

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 description coverage is 100% (both parameters have descriptions in the schema). The description does not add any further meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 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 clearly states the action 'List' and the resource 'update sets (changesets)', using specific verbs and nouns. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_changeset' (individual retrieval) and 'publish_changeset' (mutation). The prerequisite 'requires SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true' adds important context.

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 a key prerequisite ('requires SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true'), which tells agents when the tool can be used. However, it does not offer explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_update_sets' or 'get_changeset', nor does it exclude any use cases.

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