list_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries full transparency burden. It discloses that Warning-type events sort first, which is a behavioral trait. However, it does not mention whether the tool is read-only, any rate limits, or other side effects. The sorting info is useful but insufficient for full transparency.

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 very concise with one sentence, no wasted words, and front-loads key information. However, it could be restructured slightly to include a verb for clarity.

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 the availability of an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to explain return values. The tool is simple with one optional parameter, and the description covers the core functionality and sorting. It is minimally complete but lacks details like the meaning of 'recent' or any filtering capabilities.

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%, and the description does not mention the sole parameter 'limit' or its meaning (e.g., maximum number of events returned). Without schema coverage, the description must compensate, but it fails to add any semantic value beyond the schema's type and default.

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 'Recent cluster events; Warning-type events sort first' clearly identifies the tool as listing recent cluster events and states a specific sorting behavior, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_deployments or list_pods. However, it could be more explicit with a verb like 'List'.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools are all distinct, but the description does not clarify context or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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