list_events

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. It adds useful behavior details like sorting order, max results, and cluster selection, but does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation or disclose any potential side effects, permissions, or error 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 concise, with the main purpose in the first sentence and parameter details following. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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?

The description covers scope, ordering, result limit, and parameter semantics, which is adequate for a simple list tool. With an output schema present, return values are not needed in the description. Slight gap: no mention of potential error scenarios or use case context, but these are minor for this tool.

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?

The schema only provides type and default for 'cluster', with 0% description coverage. The tool description fully explains the parameter, including the allowed values ('local'/'cloud'), their meanings (local k3s vs Alibaba Cloud k3s), and the default value.

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 tool lists recent events across all namespaces, sorted by time descending, with a max of 20 entries. This is a specific verb+resource+scope and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_pods or list_namespaces.

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. It doesn't mention any exclusion criteria or preferred use cases beyond the basic list operation.

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