cleanuparr_list_search_events

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation. The description adds a minor behavioral detail about search_status supporting repeated enum filters, which is useful but not extensive. It does not disclose pagination behavior, sorting semantics, or any other side effects, but with the annotation covering safety, this is adequate.

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 a single concise sentence plus a focused note about one parameter. Every word earns its place, and the structure is clear and easily scannable.

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?

While an output schema exists, the description fails to convey the tool's full capability. It does not mention pagination, filtering options beyond search_status, sorting, or instance filtering. Given 11 parameters, this is a significant completeness gap for an agent trying to decide how to invoke it effectively.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description needed to compensate by explaining the parameters. It only addresses search_status ('can contain repeated enum filters'), leaving the other 10 parameters (page, search, grabbed, etc.) entirely undocumented. This is insufficient for an 11-parameter tool with no enums or parameter descriptions.

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 'List Seeker search events' clearly uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies a distinct resource ('Seeker search events'), differentiating it from sibling tools like list_events or get_event. It is immediately obvious what this tool does.

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 explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of ideal use cases, exclusions, or comparisons to other event-listing tools. The only contextual hint is the tool's name and the brief description, which is insufficient for choosing between similar tools.

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