Iterate Events Next

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully reveals that the URL must be the exact one returned previously (i.e. it is an opaque continuation token, not a constructible query), but discloses nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or behavior at the end of pagination.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the action and endpoint, with no filler. Every clause earns its place by implying both how pagination continues and why the URL must be reused verbatim.

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 simple continuation tool with no output schema the description is roughly adequate, but the undocumented `account` parameter and the absence of any end-of-pagination or failure behavior leave gaps an agent would have to guess at.

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%, so the description is the only source of meaning. It does add real semantics for `next_url` (must be the exact URL from the previous page), but the second parameter `account` is left entirely 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?

States a specific verb (fetches the next page) and resource (events iterate endpoint), making the pagination-continuation role unambiguous. It does not explicitly name the sibling iterate_events_page, but the phrase 'the previous page' implicitly separates it from the first-page call.

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 implies the usage condition: you call this only when you hold a `next` URL returned by a prior page. However, it never names iterate_events_page as the sibling that produces that URL, nor states what to do when no next URL is available, so the routing guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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