list_reviews

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose useful traits: newest-first ordering, the 7-day default for after, and Frigate's 24-hour fallback when after is unset. However, it omits limit and camera behavior and does not explicitly state read-only safety.

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 front-loaded with the resource and ordering, then gives severity and time-filter details without filler. Every sentence adds information.

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 five-parameter read list with no annotations, it covers the most important time-window and severity semantics, and the output schema reduces the need to describe return values. It remains incomplete because limit and camera semantics and sibling-tool selection guidance are missing.

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 explain all five parameters. It covers severity values and after/before formats and defaults, but limit and camera are left undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

It identifies the resource clearly as review items, ties them to what the Frigate UI shows, and states newest-first ordering. It lacks an explicit verb like list and does not distinguish itself from siblings such as list_events or review_summary, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 explains filter semantics for severity and after/before, but gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not say when to choose list_reviews over list_events or review_summary.

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