query_interval_analysis

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

Annotations indicate a read-only, non-destructive operation, which is consistent with the description. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond that—it does not explain what an 'elapsed interval' includes, how events are matched, or any limitations.

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 single sentence with no redundant words, making it very concise and easy to read. It is appropriately front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 nested parameters and several sibling tools, this description is far too minimal. It lacks details about how the time range options work, the meaning of interval results, and any usage context, leaving significant gaps for the 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (start_event, end_event, time_range). The schema provides type information but no semantic guidance on how these parameters interact or should be used.

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 queries elapsed intervals between a start and end event, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like query_event_analysis or query_retention_analysis.

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 alternative analysis tools. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or recommended use cases.

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