query_event_log

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states that the tool queries via Get-WinEvent, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, potential errors, performance impact, or whether it can read logs other than System (despite log_name default). The description is too brief to provide adequate transparency.

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 concise (single sentence) and front-loaded. However, conciseness comes at the cost of completeness; it does not earn its place by providing value beyond the name. It is not verbose, but it is under-specified.

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 tool has 5 parameters with low schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly inadequate. It does not explain the return values, the behavior of parameters, or how this tool fits into the broader set of sibling tools. The description is incomplete for an AI agent to use effectively.

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 only 20% (only the 'level' parameter has a brief description). The tool description adds no parameter explanations whatsoever. For example, parameters like event_ids, max_events, and hours_back are completely unexplained. The description fails to compensate for the low schema 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 the action (query) and resource (Windows event log) and mentions the underlying cmdlet. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_security_events, which may also query event logs. The purpose is specific enough for an agent to understand the basic function.

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 get_security_events. No prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or context for selection are provided. The description offers no help in deciding between sibling tools.

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