Explain an event

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. Description adds valuable context about the explanation's content (evidence, contradictions, affected assets, impact paths), which goes beyond annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('explain a TNL event') and lists key aspects. No wasted words.

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?

Adequate for a read-only explanation tool with output schema, but lacks detail on the 'focus' parameter and usage scenarios. Could include example or clarify optional parameter.

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 only 50% (one of two parameters has a description). The tool description adds no meaning to parameters beyond what the schema provides. The 'focus' parameter is unexplained.

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?

Clearly states verb 'explain' and resource 'TNL event', and specifies what the explanation includes (evidence, contradictions, affected assets, impact paths). Distinguishes from siblings like tnl_impact_path which focuses solely on impact paths.

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?

Implies usage ('Ask Ledger AI to explain...') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like tnl_impact_path or tnl_entity_intelligence.

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