query_events

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that filters are exact, combined with AND, and results are newest first. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but for a query tool, the core behavior is clear.

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?

Two short sentences, each adding essential information: purpose in the first, query logic in the second. No wasted words.

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 query behavior but does not describe the return format or output schema. For a tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, more detail about the returned events would improve completeness.

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 description adds that all input properties are exact-match filters combined with AND, which provides semantic context beyond the schema. However, it does not explain individual parameters, their types, or allowed values beyond what the schema provides.

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 queries an append-only ledger with exact filter matching, explicitly excludes semantic search, and specifies AND-combination and newest-first ordering. This distinguishes it from siblings like read_posts or search-like tools.

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 notes that the tool does not do semantic search, implying an alternative exists, but it does not name specific sibling tools or provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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