Activity Stream

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is read-only and idempotent. The description adds value by specifying the types of events included (tasks, decisions, blockers, sessions) and the time range and filtering behavior, though it does not detail output format or potential performance considerations.

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 brief, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. The bullet-like format for event examples is efficient and easy to scan.

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?

Despite clear purpose, the description lacks an overview of the return value (e.g., list of event objects with timestamps) and does not provide enough context for an agent to fully understand the output. With no output schema, more detail is needed.

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 75% (3 of 4 parameters described in schema). The description summarizes these parameters ('filter by workflow, time range, and event types') but adds no new details beyond what is already in the schema. The 'limit' parameter lacks description in both schema and description.

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 'Get recent activity events' with specific verb and resource, and lists examples that distinguish it from sibling tools focusing on individual items like tasks or blockers.

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 mentions filtering options but does not explicitly explain when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., cph_task_list for specific user tasks). Usage context is implied but not clarified.

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