strapi_list_events

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions filtering and pagination but doesn't describe the return format (e.g., array of events with fields), error conditions, authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether it's a read-only operation (implied but not stated).

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 list tool with rich schema coverage (100%) but no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral context and output information that would be helpful for an AI agent. The schema handles parameters well, but the description doesn't compensate for missing annotations.

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%, providing full documentation for all 6 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning filtering and pagination generally, but doesn't explain parameter interactions or provide additional semantic context. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('events'), and specifies filtering and pagination capabilities. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'strapi_get_event' (singular retrieval) but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list tools like 'strapi_list_blog_posts' beyond the resource type.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to use 'strapi_list_events' versus 'strapi_get_event' (singular retrieval) or other list tools, nor does it provide context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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