apex_add_activity_stream

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

The description only says 'Add an activity/audit stream' and mentions SQL aliasing. It doesn't disclose side effects, permission needs, idempotency behavior, or what happens if requirements are not met. Annotations are all false, providing minimal safety profile, so the description carries the burden but adds little.

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 sentences: a clear purpose statement and a critical SQL requirement. No fluff, 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?

Despite having 12 parameters and an output schema, the description provides almost no high-level context beyond the name and a single constraint. It doesn't explain what an activity/audit stream is, when to use it, or best practices for the SQL query. The schema provides parameter details but not operational context.

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 92%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds value by specifying that SQL must alias TIMESTAMP, USER_NAME, ACTION, which is not in the schema. This slight extra meaning justifies a baseline 3 rather than lower.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Add an activity/audit stream.' This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools like apex_add_timeline or apex_add_region. The additional SQL alias requirement adds useful specific detail.

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 choose this tool over alternatives. The only usage-related detail is the SQL alias requirement, which is a constraint rather than contextual guidance. It doesn't mention scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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