skill_events

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral aspects such as side effects, required permissions, or return behavior. The phrase 'skill events' gives no indication of what happens when the tool is invoked.

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?

While the text is short, it is not concise in the meaningful sense; it is under-specified. A two-word phrase that merely echoes the name is not content that earns its place—it provides no information at all.

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 five parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is completely inadequate. An agent has no idea what this tool does, what inputs mean, or what to expect in return. This is worse than a minimal viable description.

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 adds no meaning to any of the five parameters (job_id, trace_id, request_id, tool_version, schema_version). All are just raw strings with no explanation of their purpose or format. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'skill events' is a restatement of the tool name, providing no verb or resource. It does not state what the tool does, what an event is, or how it relates to skills. This is a tautology with zero informative value.

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 on when to use this tool or which alternatives to prefer. With numerous sibling tools, no context or differentiation is provided, leaving the agent to guess the intended usage.

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