fcp_get_events

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a read operation ('Get'), but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive, has no side effects, or require permissions. Acceptable for a simple retrieval but could be more explicit.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences with no wasted words. The main action is front-loaded in the first sentence.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but existence noted), the description is sufficiently complete for a simple retrieval tool with one optional parameter. It covers the basic functionality; additional context about event semantics might help but is not essential.

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 explains the parameter library_name is optional and filters events, adding meaning beyond the schema which only provides title and default. Schema description coverage is 0%, so description compensates well.

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 retrieves events from libraries, with optional filtering by library name. The verb 'Get' and resource 'events' are specific, and it differentiates from siblings like fcp_get_libraries and fcp_get_projects, though not explicitly.

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?

Implies usage context: to get events from all libraries omit name, or filter with library_name. However, no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives or prerequisites.

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