get_events

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'query' and lists filters; it does not mention default limits, pagination behavior, result ordering, whether filters combine, or what the response contains. For a 10-parameter tool this is a significant gap.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, followed by a compact list of filter capabilities. It could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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's complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too minimal to be complete. It does not explain how filters combine, the default limit, pagination semantics, or the shape of returned events. The 100% schema coverage helps with parameter syntax but does not fill the behavioral and contextual gaps.

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 the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds some useful grouping and examples (categories like DOM, USER, ERROR, CONSOLE, NETWORK), but it largely paraphrases the schema without adding deeper meaning about parameter interactions or formats.

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 'Query recorded events' and enumerates the main filter dimensions (category, type, timestamp range, target node, search query). It is specific enough to convey the core purpose, though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_events_around or get_network_events.

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 guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_events_around, get_timeline, or get_network_events. The filtering list implies general usage, but no exclusions, prerequisites, or sibling routing are provided.

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