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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description adds non-obvious context on top: it is an Enterprise-gated feature, results are ordered newest first, and access is required. It still doesn't disclose pagination/truncation behavior at the 500-entry cap, which is the one behavioral gap.

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?

Two sentences, no filler: the first is a usage trigger, the second packs the read-only guarantee, ordering, and prerequisites. Front-loaded with the decision-relevant 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?

For a 3-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, trigger conditions, ordering, and the Enterprise gate; the safety profile is carried by annotations. Only the return shape and cap behavior are left implicit, a minor gap.

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% – limit, since, and space_id are all documented in the schema, including the 'call list-spaces first' hint. The description only restates that space_id must be numeric and Enterprise-gated, adding no syntax or format meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('returns the Space activity/audit log') plus its ordering ('newest first'), which cleanly separates it from neighbors like list-webhook-logs and get-space-document. An agent can identify the tool from the description alone.

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?

Explicitly names the triggering user intents: 'what changed in a Space, who changed settings, sync events, document actions, or recent activity.' It also states the Enterprise prerequisite. It does not name an alternative tool or a when-not condition, so it falls short of a 5.

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