wrike_get_audit_log

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. 'Get' implies a read operation, but it does not confirm non-mutation, detail any authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination, or output behavior. This ambiguity could cause the agent to misuse the tool.

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 concise five-word sentence with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the key action and resource. However, the extreme brevity may contribute to the lack of context in other dimensions.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what audit log entries represent, how they are filtered or ordered, or what the response contains. The description is too terse to be considered complete for an AI agent.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for all 5 parameters (limit, userIds, operations, eventDateStart, eventDateEnd), so the description adds no additional parameter details. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema fully covers parameter meaning.

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 identifies the action 'Get' and the resource 'audit log entries'. This is specific enough to distinguish the tool from sibling tools like wrike_list_tasks or wrike_get_contact, none of which target audit logs.

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, prerequisites, or alternative tools. It simply restates the tool's name without any contextual scenario, leaving the agent without direction on when to choose this over others.

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