np_query_spike_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool returns spike timings over a window, but does not explain whether the window is relative to current time, how limit affects results, or what fsname refers to. This lacks the detail needed to anticipate tool behavior.

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 sentence with no fluff, making it concise and front-loaded with the core concept. It is not overly verbose, but it could be slightly more structured by explicitly naming parameters or the action. Still, it earns a high score for conciseness.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not describe the return format, the meaning of the parameters beyond 'window', or any edge cases or limitations. The tool may be simple, but the description lacks essential context for reliable use.

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 33% (only window_sec has a schema description). The description adds minimal context by mentioning 'over a window,' which aligns with window_sec, but it says nothing about limit or fsname. Thus, it does not sufficiently compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool returns 'individual spike timings over a window,' which identifies the resource (spike events) and distinguishes it from sibling count tools like np_count_spikes and np_query_spike_count. However, the verb is implied by the tool name ('query') rather than explicitly stated, and there's no explicit differentiation from other spike-related queries.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions, prerequisites, or comparisons to siblings such as np_query_spike_count, np_count_spikes, or np_query_triggers, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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