ck_monitor_subscribe

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

The description claims the tool provides 'read-only visibility,' but annotations set readOnlyHint=false, creating a direct contradiction. No other behavioral details (e.g., subscription limits, side effects) are disclosed.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. Purpose and key constraints are front-loaded.

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 output schema and annotations, the description adequately covers core functionality but fails to resolve the contradiction regarding read-only behavior, leaving ambiguity.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions that are clear and sufficient (100% coverage). The description adds minimal extra value beyond examples for event_types.

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 action ('subscribe'), resource ('session events'), and mechanism ('via webhook'), and distinguishes it from related tools like ck_session.

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 usage for remote monitoring but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ck_observability) or when not to use it.

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