get_timeline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get events' without describing output format, ordering, completeness, or error handling. It doesn't state whether it returns a list, summary, or detailed entries, nor how it handles invalid years.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. No filler words; every word earns its place.

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 low-complexity tool with one well-documented parameter, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no output schema, it fails to describe the return value (e.g., array of events, format), and it does not mention when to prefer this over the similar on_this_day tool. More context would improve usability.

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% with a clear description of the 'year' parameter, and the description's examples echo the schema's examples (2364, 22nd century). The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clear verb 'Get' plus specific resource 'Star Trek events for a specific in-universe year'. Distinguishes from siblings like get_episode (focused on a single episode) by scoping to a year/era. The purpose is immediately understandable.

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 clearly specifies the use case: fetching events for a specific in-universe year. It doesn't explicitly call out alternatives or exclusions, but the 'in-universe year' qualifier provides clear context that differentiates from date-based tools like on_this_day.

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