np_query_spike_events

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it queries a database for spike timings, offering no information about side effects, return format, pagination, or any operational constraints. This is a significant gap for an agent selecting the tool.

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 a single, compact sentence that is easy to parse, and it front-loads the tool's purpose. The 'SpikeEventQuery:' segment is somewhat redundant with the tool name, but overall it remains efficient and clutter-free.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and only 33% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining return values and usage details. It does not, leaving the agent without critical information about what the query returns or how parameters like fsname affect the result.

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?

The schema only describes 'window_sec' ('Look back this many seconds'), and the description's 'over a window' aligns with that. However, 'limit' and 'fsname' are left unexplained by both the schema and the description, so the description adds little to parameter understanding beyond what's already minimal.

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 specifies that the tool retrieves 'individual spike timings over a window', clearly distinguishing it from spike-count or trigger queries in the same domain. It names the resource (spike events) and the operation (querying), but could be more explicit about returning a list of events.

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 implies this tool is for detailed spike-level data rather than aggregate counts, which is evident from phrases like 'individual spike timings'. However, it never explicitly states when to use this instead of sibling tools such as np_query_spike_count or np_query_triggers, leaving some ambiguity.

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