get_vault_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It simply states 'Get vault staking event history' without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, what events are included, ordering, or pagination (despite a limit parameter). The lack of detail makes it hard for an agent to anticipate behavior.

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 extremely concise (5 words), but conciseness comes at the cost of adequacy. It lacks structure and necessary details. While it is front-loaded, it is under-specified for a tool with two parameters and many siblings.

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, no annotations, and many sibling tools, the description provides insufficient context. It does not explain return values, parameter usage, or when to choose this tool over alternatives. The description is far from complete.

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%, meaning the description must explain parameters. It fails to mention either 'action' or 'limit' or provide any context for their values. The agent has no guidance on how to set these parameters.

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 states 'Get vault staking event history,' providing a clear verb and resource. However, it lacks specificity on what constitutes a vault staking event and does not differentiate from other event-fetching tools like get_loan_events or get_vesting_events. It is not a tautology but could be more precise.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus similar event-listing tools. Siblings like get_loan_events, get_market_events, and get_vesting_events exist, yet no differentiation is offered.

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