list_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add value by specifying 'GET /events', indicating a read-only operation and clarifying that it returns definitions rather than instances. However, it does not mention pagination behavior, ordering, permissions, or response complexity.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the resource and endpoint with no filler. Every part contributes to understanding the tool's core purpose.

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 sparse schema, lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It identifies the resource and method but fails to explain how the optional pagination parameters work or what the response looks like, so an agent may not call it correctly with non-default parameters.

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 adds no meaning to the three parameters: after, limit, and before. The agent is left to guess whether these are dates, cursors, offsets, or something else, with no compensating guidance in the description.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List custom-event definitions' and includes the exact endpoint 'GET /events'. This clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from event-related siblings like send_event, create_event, update_event, and delete_event.

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 intended use is implied by the name and resource type, but the description does not explicitly explain when to choose this over alternatives or mention any exclusions. There is no direct sibling for listing custom events, but no when-to-use guidance is provided either.

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