get_folkeregisteret_hendelser

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only states that it gets events, but does not mention that it operates on sequence numbers (fraSekvens) or what the response looks like, which is a significant gap for a paginated event stream.

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 redundant words. Front-loaded with action verb and resource, and the purpose clause is efficient.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain the sequence-number-based pagination mechanism and how it relates to the current sequence tool. It does not, leaving the agent unsure how to use fraSekvens or what the returned events contain.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline stands.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' tied to a concrete resource ('population register change events'), and adds a clarifying Norwegian term 'hendelsesliste' plus a usage purpose ('track changes to person records'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_person_folkeregisteret which fetch single person records.

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 explicitly states a use case ('Use to track changes to person records'), indicating when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as pointing to get_folkeregisteret_current_sekvens for the latest sequence number.

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