list_runs

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

注释已声明readOnlyHint=true和destructiveHint=false，覆盖了安全性。描述额外提到排序方式（创建时间倒序），这是注释未提供的。但未提及返回格式、分页或任何限制，这些对于此类工具是常见的。由于注释已提供基本安全信息，描述本身无需重复，但补充的价值有限。

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?

描述仅有一句话，简洁明了，没有任何冗余内容。它直接陈述了核心功能和排序方式，结构清晰。虽然省略了部分细节，但就所包含的信息而言，做到了精炼。

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?

该工具参数简单（单可选limit），注释齐全，且无输出schema要求。描述提供了排序行为，但未提及如何设置limit或默认行为。对于这样一个基本工具，描述基本足够，但缺少参数使用说明使上下文略有缺口。

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?

输入schema中只有一个可选参数limit，带有最小/最大约束，但schema描述覆盖率为0%。描述完全未提及limit参数的含义或用法，因此代理必须自行推断。虽然'limit'直观代表数量限制，但描述未明确说明，使得参数语义不清晰。

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?

描述明确说明了工具的功能：按创建时间倒序列出运行记录。动词'列出'和资源'运行'清晰，且排序方式提供了具体行为。虽然未与其他兄弟工具明确区分，但该描述足以让代理理解基本用途。

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?

描述未提供任何关于何时使用该工具与替代工具（如get_run、cancel_run）的明确指导。代理无法从描述中得知适用的场景或与其他列表类工具的区别，仅能通过名称推断。

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