make_list_executions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions listing newest first and showing success/failure, but does not explicitly state that it is read-only, describe error handling, pagination, or rate limits. The description adequately conveys core read behavior but lacks depth.

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 two sentences, each adding value. It is front-loaded with the main action and immediately provides key details. No redundant information.

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 absence of output schema, the description explains what is shown (success/failure and time) but does not specify the exact return format or pagination details. It is mostly complete for a list tool but omits mention of error cases or how to handle large result sets.

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%. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the status filter values (1=success, 2=warning, 3=error) and the ordering 'newest first', which is not in the schema. The limit parameter is already well-described in the schema.

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 'execution history (logs)' of a Make.com scenario, the ordering 'newest first', and what it shows (success/fail and time). It distinguishes from sibling tools like make_get_execution which likely retrieves a single execution detail.

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 use for viewing execution history with optional status filtering, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like make_get_execution, nor does it discuss when not to use it or prerequisites.

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