agora_create_replay

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one genuinely useful trait: the replay is read-only and does not re-execute external effects. However, it omits permissions/auth requirements, any mention of what 'speed' controls, cost, or limits on the replay window.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero filler, and the core scoping constraint is front-loaded before the behavioral caveat. Nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, but with no annotations and three undocumented parameters the definition leaves real gaps for an agent trying to invoke it correctly. The concept is covered; the invocation details are not.

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% across three parameters, and the description adds essentially nothing: start_event_id/end_event_id semantics and the meaning/units/ranges of 'speed' are left entirely unexplained. The phrase 'Event Ledger rows' only loosely gestures at the event id 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?

A specific verb and resource are stated ('Create a read-only replay reconstruction over Event Ledger rows'), and the read-only nature is clarified up front. It doesn't name or distinguish itself from any sibling tool, so an agent gets no routing help against the many other 'create_*' tools in this namespace.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative to select against. 'Never re-executes external effects' is a safety property, not usage guidance for deciding when to call this tool.

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