get_event_props

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden, but it only mentions the eventName requirement. It does not disclose filtering behavior, time-period handling, aggregation details, or return format, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 with no fluff, front-loading 'Breakdown of custom string/numeric properties' and stating the required parameter. It is concise and structured, though slightly under-specified.

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 tool with 11 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain how the numerous optional filters interact, the role of the 'period' parameter, or what the breakdown output looks like, making it incomplete for effective use.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 11 parameters. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the schema, but it does not need to given the high coverage.

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 tool's function: breaking down custom string/numeric properties for a specific event name. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_top_events and get_event_props requires an eventName, which is specified.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The only usage hint is 'Requires eventName,' which is a prerequisite, not a usage context. Sibling tools are not referenced.

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