list_workflow_events

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

No annotations are provided, but the description details the output structure including systemEvents, customEvents, and an error field. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state safety or authorization requirements. The description adds moderate value over annotations (none).

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 moderately detailed with a bulleted list of return fields. It is not overly verbose but could be more concise by shortening the examples and field definitions, which are already partially captured in the output schema.

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 no parameters and the output schema exists, the description provides sufficient context about what the tool does and what it returns. It covers both system and custom events and includes error handling, making it complete for a retrieval 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?

There are no parameters in the input schema. Since schema_description_coverage is 100% and the tool has zero parameters, the description adds no param info, but baseline for 0 params is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics.

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 retrieves available workflow events, specifying two types (system and custom). It uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'workflow events', but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools like 'list_workflow_activity_types'.

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 on when to use this tool over other list tools or context for usage. The description only explains what it returns, not when it is appropriate to invoke.

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