get_incident_timeline

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a 'full forensic timeline' including state transitions, rule evaluations, and policy snapshot, indicating a read-only, non-destructive operation. No contradictions.

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 sentences plus a use-case line, no wasted words. Key information is front-loaded: 'Full forensic timeline for an incident.' followed by specifics and usage guidance.

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 output schema exists, the description covers inputs (one parameter), output types (transitions, rule evaluations, policy snapshot), and use cases. Complete for a specialized forensic tool.

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 sole parameter 'incident_id' is not described in schema (0% coverage), but the description implies it identifies the incident. Meaning is clear from context, but explicit parameter documentation would improve clarity.

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 it returns 'every recorded state transition', 'rule evaluations', and 'policy snapshot', distinguishing it from siblings like get_incident (basic info) and get_policy_snapshot (only policy). It uses specific verbs and explains the forensic value.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to explain why an incident was declared/confirmed/resolved, or to audit a past detection decision.' This provides strong guidance on when to use, though it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives.

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