search-rum-events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It mentions return types (sessions, views, actions, errors) and query syntax, but omits details on side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits. The name implies read-only, but it's not stated.

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 two sentences: first states purpose and use cases, second gives query syntax and returns. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no unnecessary 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?

Given the complexity (4 params, nested filter, no output schema), the description covers use cases and query syntax but lacks details on pagination, sorting, and time range format. It is minimally complete for an agent to use but has gaps.

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 50% per context, but the description adds context for the query parameter with a syntax example. Other parameters (sort, page, limit) are not elaborated beyond the schema descriptions, so the description contributes marginally.

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 searches RUM events and provides specific use cases like 'frontend errors in production' and 'slow page loads', distinguishing it from sibling tools like aggregate-rum-events.

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?

It gives concrete scenarios for when to use the tool, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives like aggregate-rum-events or search-logs.

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