Get captured events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses return contents, ordering, and cursor longevity/validity, but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are needed, or what happens if no story is open.

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 sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, followed by cursor semantics. Every clause earns its place without redundancy.

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?

For a simple one-parameter getter with no output schema and no annotations, the description is largely complete: it lists returned fields and explains cursor behavior. Minor gaps remain around the safety profile and the no-open-story case.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful context beyond the schema by explaining that sinceSeq can come from a previous response or open_story and that seq numbers are stable for the life of the server, making cursors durable.

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 a specific purpose: retrieving everything captured in the open story, with the returned fields (name, target, detail, flags) and ordering (newest last). It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like open_story or list_stories.

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?

It explains how to use sinceSeq for incremental retrieval and notes the cursor's validity across open_story calls, implying a polling use case. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives, nor any exclusions.

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