rybbit_get_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions pagination, which is already implied by the page/pageSize parameters in the schema. It does not disclose date range behavior, sorting, response structure, rate limits, or any side effects. The event type clarification adds scope but not behavioral depth.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the primary action and resource. It contains no redundant text and earns its place by specifying the event types, which adds useful scope clarification.

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 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too minimal. It does not explain how the pieces fit together (e.g., pagination flow, date filtering, filter syntax), leaving the agent to infer critical usage context from the parameter descriptions alone.

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%, so all parameters already have descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate. It does not explain relationships between parameters like startDate vs pastMinutesStart, but the schema descriptions are sufficient.

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 retrieves a paginated list of events, enumerating the specific event types (pageviews, custom events, outbound clicks). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_sessions, get_event_names, and get_outbound_links, which target different data shapes or aggregations.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or references to sibling tools that could help the agent decide between, for example, get_events and get_sessions or get_event_names.

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