List runs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully states ordering ('newest first'), content ('checklist, progress and sign-off state'), and the 500-row limit, but it does not clarify side effects, return format, or the nuance that open_only actually means open and complete runs.

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?

Three short sentences deliver ordering, contents, filter options, and a maximum result count with no filler. The most important facts are front-loaded and every sentence adds value.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must stand alone for return expectations; it does so by naming the included run state. Parameter semantics are fully covered by the schema, and the row limit is disclosed, though exact output field names and pagination behavior beyond the limit are not specified.

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%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already documents every parameter. The description only summarizes filter categories ('checklist, status, reference, open only') without adding new semantic detail, and it omits the with_failures parameter entirely.

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 that this lists runs, ordered newest first, with checklist, progress, and sign-off state. It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like run_show, run_status, or run_start by focusing on plural listing with filtering and a row cap.

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 batch retrieval of runs and lists available filters, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over siblings like run_show or run_status, nor mention any exclusions or alternative tools.

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