get_application_events

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

No annotations are present, and the description provides no behavioral details beyond the basic purpose. It does not disclose pagination, ordering, time range, or error behavior.

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 a single sentence, which is concise and front-loaded with the action. However, for better clarity, it could be structured with bullet points or more explicit details.

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 low schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not specify the return type (list of events) or any event structure, leaving the agent with insufficient context for correct invocation.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage. The description only repeats the parameter name context ('by application name'), adding no format, constraints, or usage details. It does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 it returns events for an application by name, which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like get_application (returns the app itself) and list_applications (lists apps). However, it lacks detail on what type of events are returned.

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 such as get_resource_events. The description does not mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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