get-tag-activity

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

Without annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It indicates a read operation ('Retrieve') but fails to disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or pagination. The description does not explain the relationship between 'tag' and 'CVE' parameters.

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, concise and to the point. It front-loads the action and resource. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating tag vs CVE usage.

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 no output schema, the description should provide more context about the return format. It omits any mention of parameter constraints (e.g., mutuality of id_or_slug and cve) and defaults (days=30). The tool has moderate complexity, and the description is insufficient for complete understanding.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context by linking 'by CVE' and 'specific tag' to the parameters, but it does not elaborate on the need to provide one or the other, nor does it clarify the 'days' parameter. The added value is minimal beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'time-series that includes unique IP counts and intention activity data for a specific GreyNoise tag or by CVE'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'analyze-tags-activity' by specifying the inclusion of IP counts and intention data, but it could be more explicit about what 'intention activity data' entails.

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 versus alternatives like 'analyze-tags-activity' or 'get-tag-details'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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