recent_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. It mentions that events cover job lifecycle, printer state changes, etc., and specifies the default and maximum limit. However, it lacks details on ordering (presumably most recent first), error handling, and whether pagination is supported.

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 three short paragraphs with no superfluous text. The first sentence states purpose, then 'Args:' clearly presents parameters, and a final sentence summarizes return scope. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, parameter usage, and the types of events returned. Given the absence of an output schema, this is sufficient. Minor missing details like ordering (most recent first) and potential errors could be added but do not significantly detract.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates. It explains limit as 'Maximum number of events to return (default 20, max 100)' and type as 'Filter by event type prefix' with clear examples, adding significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Get recent events from the Kiln event bus,' specifying a concrete verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like job_history or failure_history by focusing on the general event bus.

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 explains when to use the tool and provides details on the limit and type parameters, including examples for prefix matching. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or indicate when not to use it.

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