List recent events and installs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a useful mental model (results mirror the Live dashboard), but says nothing about the default time window when no parameters are supplied, page size behavior, or whether unpaged results are capped.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though the brevity edges toward under-specification rather than maximal usefulness.

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?

With all five parameters optional, the critical missing piece is what 'recent' means by default and what the agent gets back in unpaged mode. The rich from/to/cursor schema descriptions partially compensate, and no output schema exists, but the default-window question remains unanswered.

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 80%, so the schema does most of the work: from/to document the paged-mode switch and cursor documents pagination. The description adds nothing beyond that, and the one undocumented parameter (limit, 1-50) is left without meaning in either place.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Return ... recent attribution events and installs') and anchors it to a known surface ('the Live dashboard'). It is clear what the tool yields, but it never names how it differs from siblings like export_events or list_event_deliveries, which also deal with 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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. An agent must infer that this is the lightweight, dashboard-parity listing versus the bulk export tool, which is exactly the kind of routing decision the description should settle.

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