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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and discloses key traits: default newest-first ordering, cursor pagination via next_cursor, and the changed oldest-first ordering when polling with after. It does not cover auth, rate limits, or output object shape, but the core retrieval behavior is well explained.

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 dense but front-loaded, with the event types and ordering established first and polling guidance second. The semicolon-heavy first sentence is somewhat run-on, but every clause adds 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 an eight-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is only partially complete. It explains event types, ordering, dates, and polling, but omits three parameter meanings and does not describe the returned event object structure.

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%, so the description must explain all eight parameters. It covers type, after, since/until date format, and cursor paging, but leaves limit, jurisdiction, and observed_since unexplained, and the business-ID format is not tied to a named parameter.

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 states a specific resource and return set: business.created, business.name_changed, and related event types, newest first. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling get_business_events.

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?

It gives clear polling guidance: pass after=<id of the last event> and call again while pages are full, with results becoming oldest first. It does not state when to use this instead of get_business_events or search_businesses, so it lacks explicit alternatives.

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