agentlens_query_events

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('query'), but with no annotations (e.g., readOnlyHint), the agent gets minimal behavioral clues. Absent details like pagination, sorting, or whether events are returned in chronological order, the description lacks transparency.

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 extremely concise—just one sentence—with no superfluous words. However, it may be too terse, missing important context that could be added without much bloat.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It fails to mention return format, potential event types, or behavior when limit is exceeded. The agent would need to guess or inspect schema only.

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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description doesn't add new meaning beyond what's already provided. A baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'query' and the resource 'events from an AgentLens session', making the tool's purpose straightforward. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like agentlens_log_event or agentlens_reflect, which might also involve querying session data.

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 use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools include agentlens_log_event (which logs events) and agentlens_replay (which may replay events), but the description offers no distinctions or usage context.

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