keyso_get_ai_tracker_id_mentions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that this is a GET read operation returning a list with time and type fields, which is useful, but it omits pagination behavior, response shape, auth requirements, and how the `last` or `filter` parameters affect results.

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 compact and includes essential HTTP details plus an example URL. There is mild redundancy between the opening title, the path declaration, and the example request, but overall the description stays focused and readable.

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 has eight parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, yet the description only covers the basic list-returning behavior. Missing context includes pagination semantics, filtering, auth requirements, and what the returned mention objects contain beyond time and type.

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%, so the schema already documents all eight parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 names the resource (AI tracker mentions), states the HTTP method and path, and says it returns a list of all mentions with time and mention type. This distinguishes it from sibling AI-tracker tools like `keyso_get_ai_tracker_id_entity`, `chart`, `report`, and `dates`.

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 gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternative AI-tracker endpoints. It does not state use cases, exclusions, or relationships to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage from the name alone.

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