directus_list_activity

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

No annotations provided, and description fails to disclose read-only nature, pagination behavior (despite schema default of 100), performance implications of querying large activity tables, or output format.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action. '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata noise that doesn't help the AI, but otherwise no waste.

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?

Severely lacking given zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema. Description should explain Directus filter syntax, pagination, and what activity data includes (CRUD actions? auth events?).

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 0% and description compensates with nothing. While 'site', 'limit', 'sort' are somewhat self-explanatory, critical Directus-specific syntax for 'filter' (JSON filter syntax) and 'sort' are completely undocumented. 'Site' parameter semantics unclear (URL vs ID?).

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?

Clear verb 'List' and resource 'activity log' with scope '(all actions performed in Directus)'. However, it doesn't clarify distinction from similar sibling tools like 'directus_list_revisions' or 'get_audit_log'.

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 provided on when to use this versus 'directus_list_revisions' or administrative audit tools. No mention of required permissions (activity logs often require admin access).

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