blekline_emit_event

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

The description adds 'metadata-only' and 'does not store raw prompt content', providing meaningful behavioral disclosure beyond the annotations' readOnly/destructive hints. The deprecation notice also signals lifecycle status, but it does not mention permissions or side effects.

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 two short sentences, with the deprecation notice front-loaded and the purpose stated directly. Every word contributes value, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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?

Despite having five parameters and no output schema, the description omits any explanation of parameter usage or expected behavior. While the deprecation notice mitigates the need for full documentation, the description remains incomplete for an agent that might need to invoke it.

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 no information about any of the five parameters (kind, action, platform, riskTier, entitiesMasked). With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add any meaning beyond the bare schema, which itself lacks parameter descriptions.

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 writes a metadata-only governance audit event to the Blekline workspace, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly marking itself as deprecated and naming the replacement tool, blekline_log_governance_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 description opens with '[Deprecated — use blekline_log_governance_event]', which is an explicit directive to use the alternative tool. It also clarifies the intended use case (metadata-only events, no raw prompt content), giving strong context for when to use or avoid this tool.

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