Sample Events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose the key trait that results are a small representative subset rather than an exhaustive set. However, it says nothing about how sampling is performed (random vs deterministic), permissions, rate limits, or pagination, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.

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 front-loaded sentence that states what the tool returns and when to prefer it, with no wasted words. It reads well as an at-a-glance selection cue.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, and the description explains the sampling concept but not the six parameters or the shape of the returned sample. It is adequate for choosing the tool but incomplete for invoking it precisely.

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?

Six parameters (from, until, limit, order, query, account) have 0% schema description coverage and no annotations, so the description must compensate and largely does not. 'For a query' and 'small number' faintly gesture at the query and limit parameters but provide no syntax, format, or default semantics for any of them.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('Returns a small number of representative events for a query') and characterizes its distinctive sampling role versus full-result retrieval. It does not name the specific sibling it replaces (e.g., get_events or search_and_get_events), so differentiation is implied rather than explicit.

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?

It gives a clear when-to-use rule ('when you just need examples, not the complete set') and implicitly tells the agent to avoid it when the full set is required, which is genuine routing guidance. It stops short of naming the alternative tool explicitly, so it is not a 5.

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