list_runs

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior; the description adds transparency about the output structure (compact summary then individual runs) and that metrics are computed together, with no contradictions.

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 organized with the primary purpose first, then output details, then usage guidance; each sentence adds value, including the list of computed metrics and the note about longer spans.

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 the output schema exists, the description provides all necessary context for an agent to decide when and how to use this tool, including return structure and limitations, with no missing guidance.

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?

Both parameters are fully described with format and defaults in the schema, and the description adds crucial semantics about the maximum range (92 days) and default window (7 days ago to today).

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 runs within a date range, specifies the resource and scope, and differentiates it by being the preferred single read for computed metrics, contrasting with piecing together data from multiple calls.

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?

It explicitly positions this tool as the preferred single read for specific metrics, implies alternatives by stating 'rather than pieced together from several calls', and gives usage guidance for longer spans by advising multiple consecutive calls.

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