cleanuparr_list_events

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful parameter constraints (ISO-8601 dates, page_size capped at 500), but does not disclose other behavioral details such as default pagination, filtering behavior, or response format. It avoids contradiction but adds limited context.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core purpose ('List events') is front-loaded, followed by two essential constraints. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Despite an output schema and read-only annotation, the description is too minimal for an 8-parameter tool with many siblings. It fails to explain available filters, pagination behavior, or how this listing relates to other event endpoints, leaving the agent without enough context to select and invoke it correctly.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies date format for from_date/to_date and imposes a cap for page_size, but leaves search, severity, event_type, job_run_id, and page semantically ambiguous. The description covers only a fraction of the eight 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?

The description states 'List events', which is a clear verb+resource but lacks specificity. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like cleanuparr_list_manual_events, cleanuparr_list_search_events, or cleanuparr_get_event, leaving the exact scope of 'events' ambiguous.

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. There are no explicit use cases, exclusions, or comparisons to related event-listing tools. The description simply states the action without context.

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