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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Query' (implying read-only) and 'with filters' but gives no details on pagination, limits, error handling, or what happens with invalid parameters. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 extremely short (4 words), which could be seen as concise, but it lacks essential details. It does not earn its place as it fails to provide enough information for effective tool invocation.

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 complexity (7 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It neglects to describe return format, parameter formats, or any constraints, making it nearly useless for an agent.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the 7 parameters (to, from, limit, agentId, riskMin, sessionId, actionType). The phrase 'with filters' is too vague to add meaning, leaving the agent to guess parameter purposes from names alone.

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 'Query agent actions with filters' identifies the verb (query) and resource (agent actions), and implies filtering. However, it lacks specificity about what exactly constitutes 'agent actions' and does not clearly differentiate from sibling tools like agent_audit_record or agent_audit_report, though the verb 'query' suggests a list operation.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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