search_events

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by explaining the default region derived from TAEGIS_ENVIRONMENT, the default limit, and the return format as a JSON array. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, error behavior, or rate limits, which are common for search tools.

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 compact docstring with a one-line purpose, a short Args section, and a Returns line. It is front-loaded and concise, with no filler or redundant prose.

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?

For a simple search tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, parameters, and return type. However, it lacks usage guidance (when to choose this over sibling tools) and does not elaborate on query syntax, which prevents it from being fully contextually complete.

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%, so the description is the sole source of parameter meaning. It explains 'query' as an event query string, 'region' as the Taegis environment with a default, and 'limit' as the maximum result count. While this adds value beyond the schema, 'query' lacks syntax or example details, leaving some ambiguity.

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 opens with a clear verb and resource: 'Search Taegis security events.' This directly states the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_alerts, search_investigations, and search_threat_intel, which target different data 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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_alerts or search_investigations. The description only covers mechanics (query, region, limit) and does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or a decision framework.

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