waf_event_detail

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the content returned (headers, body snippet, rule matches, response code) and the effect of the verbose parameter. However, it does not mention rate limits, authentication, or error conditions, which are minor omissions for a read-only tool.

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 two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second lists key outputs. Every sentence adds value.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main behavior and parameter effects. It lacks details on output structure or potential errors, but it is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand basic usage.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that index is from a previous query and verbose toggles truncation. The since parameter description is essentially repeated from the schema. No additional syntax or format details are provided.

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 ('Full deep-dive' and 'Shows') and the specific resource ('a single event by index'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like waf_events_by_ip or waf_events_by_rule which list multiple events, as this tool provides detailed information for one event.

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 implies that the tool is used when you have an index from a previous query and want detailed event info, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like waf_events_by_ip or waf_events_by_rule. No when-not or alternative recommendations are provided.

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