List Pending Decisions

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

The annotations already indicate the tool is read-only and non-destructive. The description adds the behavioral context that it returns only 'open/unresolved' decisions, which is beyond what the annotations provide.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the primary purpose, and the second provides usage guidance, making it easy to scan.

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?

For a simple list tool with good annotations and an output schema, the description is adequately complete. It explains when to use and what it returns (open decisions). However, it could briefly mention that scope and bucket filters affect results, though this is covered in the schema.

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 schema already describes all parameters. The description does not add additional meaning to any parameter, meeting the baseline expectation.

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' and the resource 'open/unresolved decisions.' It provides the tool's purpose upfront and distinguishes it from other list tools (e.g., list_memory_todos) by focusing specifically on decisions.

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 explicitly tells when to call the tool: when the user asks about pending decisions or before planning work dependent on unresolved choices. It does not mention when not to use it, but the usage context is clear enough.

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