task_event_count

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

No annotations provided; the description claims 'Required: q, searchQuerys' but the input schema shows no required parameters, a contradiction. No disclosure of behavior like read-only, performance, or side effects.

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 run-on line with no structure, mixing path, command, and a long list of allowed values. Extremely poorly organized.

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?

The tool counts task events, but the description does not specify what 'task' refers to. No output schema, and no differentiation from similar count tools among 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 coverage is 100% with brief descriptions. The description adds allowed values for analyticsEventAction, which adds value, but also incorrectly marks parameters as required, detracting from semantics.

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 says 'Count objects by stuff', which is vague and does not clarify that this tool specifically counts task events. The name suggests it, but the description does not reinforce that.

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 versus siblings like incident_event_count or task_endpoints_event_count. No when-to or when-not-to information.

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