import_resultlist

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it flags that this WRITES/publishes data, demands explicit user confirmation, and states the EVENTOR_USERNAME/EVENTOR_PASSWORD credential requirement. It omits idempotency, overwrite behavior, and failure handling, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Front-loads the action and the critical write warning, then lists the arg and credential requirement. Every line earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation; the description covers action, safety precondition, payload format, and auth requirements. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 0% for the single iof_xml parameter, so the description must compensate — and it does, specifying the expected format as a complete IOF XML 3.0 ResultList document passed as a string. No further syntax detail is given, so not a 5.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: upload/publish a result list to Eventor. The resource 'result list' distinguishes it from the sibling import_startlist and other read tools, though it never explicitly says so.

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?

Gives a clear precondition — only call after explicit user confirmation to publish these exact results — which is strong when-to-use guidance for a write tool. It doesn't name alternatives (e.g. import_startlist) or when-not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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