Watch OrcaSlicer events

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds behavioral context beyond that by specifying the bounded window and the specific event categories collected. This gives the agent a clear sense of the tool's scope and duration without needing to infer it from annotations alone.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('Collect') and packs key details (event types, bounded window) without wasted words.

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?

The tool is simple (one param, no nested objects, no output schema). The description covers what it does and gives the event types and time bound. It doesn't explain the return format, but for a streaming tool this is less critical, and the readOnly annotation plus bounded window give sufficient context.

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?

The schema has one parameter 'seconds' with a default of 10, but description coverage is 0%. The description mentions 'bounded window' which hints at the seconds parameter, but it does not explicitly explain that seconds controls the collection duration. This adds some meaning but is still somewhat ambiguous.

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 uses a specific verb 'Collect' and identifies the exact resource ('live events') with a scoped set of event types (slice.*/config.changed/project.opened). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_slice_status which provide status snapshots, not streaming 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?

The description implies usage for watching live changes over a bounded window, which provides clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over polling or mention alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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