tc_audit_tail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value by naming the record categories included (mutating calls, confirmations, mode changes), but says nothing about ordering, time window, or how many records actually exist.

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?

A single brief sentence with no filler, and the scope ('last n') is front-loaded ahead of the clarifying parenthetical. Nothing needs trimming.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations carry the safety profile. For a one-parameter read tool this is close to complete, with only ordering and record-availability behavior left unstated.

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 schema only exposes 'n' as an untitled integer with default 50. The description partially compensates by tying 'n' to the number of audit records returned, but adds no bounds, units, or behavior when n exceeds available records.

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 states the resource (audit records) and its scope ('last n'), and enumerates the record kinds it returns (mutating calls, confirmations, mode changes). That makes the tool's output distinguishable from siblings like tc_safety_status or tcunit_results, though the verb is implicit ('Last n audit records') rather than a clean action phrase.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. An agent must infer from the name and the parenthetical that this is for inspecting recent audit/safety-related activity.

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