list_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the default ordering (newest first) and that filtering is inclusive-by-default, which are real behavioral facts, but it never states that this is a read-only listing, nor anything about pagination despite a limit parameter.

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?

Very compact and front-loaded: the resource and ordering come first, then the parameter notes. Nothing is padded, though the telegraphic style costs a little readability.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the filtering dimensions that matter for selecting results are covered at least at a surface level. The missing camera/limit detail is a parameter gap rather than a blocking incompleteness for a list tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents the accepted time formats for after/before (ISO 8601 or unix seconds) and gives concrete label examples, but leaves camera and limit entirely unexplained.

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?

"Tracked-object events, newest first" states the resource and the ordering explicitly, which is more than the name alone conveys. It distinguishes itself from get_event and list_reviews by scoping to the event list, though it never says so directly.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus get_event, list_reviews, or latest_frame, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The only implicit guidance comes from filter descriptions like has_description, which hint at narrowing rather than routing.

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