athena_emit_agent_event

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It adds one useful behavioral disclosure: 'private chain-of-thought is neither requested nor stored,' which conveys a privacy guarantee. However, it doesn't mention side effects, permissions, or the nature of 'liminal telemetry,' leaving much undisclosed.

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 two tightly packed clauses. It front-loads the core purpose ('Emit public liminal telemetry') and adds the privacy clarification without wasted words. Every word 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?

Given the tool's complexity (15 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is under-specified. It does not explain what 'liminal telemetry' means, how to fill the required parameters, or what the tool returns. The context provided is too sparse 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 coverage is 0%, and the description provides no parameter-specific details. It references 'agent task' but never maps to the 15 schema properties (e.g., seq, intent, action, status), so the agent must rely on parameter names alone, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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's function with a specific verb ('Emit') and resource ('public liminal telemetry for an agent task'). It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly noting that private chain-of-thought is neither requested nor stored, which narrows its scope relative to other athena_* 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 implies usage for agent task telemetry, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it name alternative tools. With many sibling tools, some exclusionary context would help but is absent.

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