get_timeline

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It states that the tool returns a 'detailed chronological event feed' with 'full content previews,' implying a read-only operation with no side effects. No contradictions with annotations (none present).

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 and well-structured: a clear purpose sentence, a comparison with a sibling tool, a use-case statement, and a parameter list. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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 presence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values. It adequately covers purpose, usage context, parameter semantics, and comparison with a sibling tool. No gaps remain for an agent to misuse 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 description provides an explicit Args section that explains both parameters beyond what the schema offers. It specifies valid values for 'date' ('today', 'yesterday', or 'YYYY-MM-DD') and explains 'limit' as 'Maximum events to return (default 20).' This is essential given 0% schema description 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 tool's purpose: 'Get a detailed chronological event feed for a specific date.' It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_activity by noting that it returns more detail per event, including full content previews.

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 context on when to use this tool ('useful for reconstructing what happened on a day') and compares it to get_activity. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternative tools for different scenarios.

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