List Change Event Types

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

Annotations indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent. The description adds value by detailing pagination behavior: 'Use page and per_page to control pagination; the response includes pagination metadata.' No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise with four sentences, front-loading key information (purpose, usage, pagination, API details). It efficiently packs necessary information without verbosity.

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?

For a simple list tool, the description covers purpose, usage, pagination, and API reference. It mentions the return format ('paginated JSON array') but lacks details about the internal structure of change event types. However, given the tool's straightforward nature and annotations, it is largely complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The description reiterates the required parameter (company_id) and mentions page/per_page for pagination, but adds little new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'Change Event Types', and the scope 'for a Specified Company'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings by focusing on event types and includes pagination details.

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?

The description provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use this to enumerate Change Events when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It does not explicitly state when not to use or offer alternatives, but the context is clear.

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