codesweep_list_items

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

The description discloses important behavioral edge cases: archived_only and include_archived are mutually exclusive, 0 limit means no entries, and negative limits are errors. It also explains legacy behavior changes. Since no annotations are present, this detail carries the full burden and does so well, though it never explicitly states that the operation is read-only.

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 concise and front-loaded with a clear summary sentence, followed by a tight bullet list. The historical notes are verbose but earn their place by preventing serious misinterpretation of limit and archived_only behavior.

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?

The description covers all six parameters and their tricky semantics, and the output schema covers return shape. It lacks details like valid state values or ordering behavior, but those are less critical for a filtered listing tool with such thorough parameter documentation.

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?

The schema only provides types and defaults, while the description adds rich semantics: sweep_ref accepts SW-N ID or name, limit's 0/negative behavior, archived-only semantics, and the mutual exclusivity constraint. This far exceeds the schema and compensates fully for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'List items in a sweep with optional filters,' giving a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling codesweep_list, but the 'items in a sweep' wording sufficiently narrows the purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as codesweep_list, codesweep_status, or codebench_list. The description explains what the tool does but not when it should be preferred or avoided.

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