list-trace-attachments

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

No annotations provided; the description carries the burden. It only mentions a version requirement but lacks details on behavior such as whether it returns metadata or content, pagination, ordering, or side effects.

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, concise sentence that conveys the essential information with no redundant words or filler.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate but could specify what kind of attachments (e.g., file attachments vs. metadata). It meets minimum viability but lacks depth.

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?

Input schema has one parameter with a description ('Trace ID'), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'attachments on a trace', and includes a version constraint 'MLflow 3.9+'. This distinguishes it from siblings like get-trace-attachment and list-artifacts.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose is implied but not compared to siblings like get-trace-attachment (single attachment) or list-artifacts.

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