list_events

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

The description indicates that the tool returns event name, component tag, description, and detail type. With no annotations provided, it adequately covers the tool's read-only nature and output structure, though it could mention lack of side effects.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes return information. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, lack of output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return values completely. No critical information 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 100%, and the description adds meaning by explaining that 'tagName' is an optional filter and 'libraryId' targets a specific library. This enriches the schema definitions.

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 a specific verb ('list') and resource ('all events across all components'), clearly stating the tool's function. It distinguishes from siblings like 'check_event_usage' which focuses on usage checking.

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 mentions optional filtering by tag name, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the context of listing vs checking events is clear enough for an agent to discern usage.

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