incident_event_count_1

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only says 'Count objects by stuff' and lists allowed values, but no info on side effects, auth needs, or read-only nature.

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?

Description is a single vague sentence followed by a huge list of allowed values. Not concise, poorly structured, and hard to parse.

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?

Missing key context: what does 'stuff' mean? What does the body parameter do? Does not explain how to use the tool effectively or how it differs from many similar counting siblings.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters with basic info. Description adds allowed values for analyticsEventAction, which is helpful, but also incorrectly claims q is required, reducing clarity.

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?

Description says 'Count objects by stuff,' which is vague and does not clearly state the tool's purpose. It does not differentiate from sibling tool 'incident_event_count' and other counting tools.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'incident_event_count' or 'incident_event_filter'. Misstates 'Required: q' but q is optional in schema.

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