list_asset_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains that events are produced when a task updates an asset/dataset and that they can trigger downstream DAGs. The return fields are listed. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior or any failure modes, which would be a minor improvement.

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 well-structured with sections for purpose, usage, return info, and args. It is slightly verbose but each sentence adds value. Could be tightened by merging the initial statement with the first usage line.

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 tool has 4 optional parameters and an output schema (described in words), the description covers all necessary details: purpose, use cases, return fields, and parameter semantics. It is complete for an AI agent to invoke correctly.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains all four parameters in the 'Args' section with clear meanings (e.g., 'Filter events by the DAG that produced them'). The default for limit is also mentioned (100). This fully compensates 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 clearly states the tool lists asset/dataset events with optional filtering. It uses a specific verb-resource combination ('List asset/dataset events') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on events from task updates and data-aware scheduling triggers.

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 provides explicit usage scenarios starting with 'Use this tool when the user asks about:' and lists five concrete queries. This helps the agent understand when to invoke this tool versus others like get_upstream_asset_events or list_dags.

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