arvan_audit_log

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not required to disclose read-only behavior. It adds that the tool returns 'mutating tool calls' and 'newest last', but does not describe pagination, rate limits, or truncation behavior. Basic transparency is achieved but lacks deeper details.

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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It effectively communicates the core functionality without redundancy.

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 simple tool (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description should at least hint at the return format or the effect of the limit parameter. It does not mention what fields are returned or how ordering works with the limit. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to interpret correctly.

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 does not mention the limit_entries parameter at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the burden falls on the description to explain the parameter, but it fails to do so. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but no additional semantic guidance is provided.

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 returns the most recent mutating tool calls with a specific ordering (newest last). It uses a specific verb 'Return' and a specific resource 'most recent mutating tool calls', distinguishing it from sibling tools that list other resources.

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 retrieving mutating audit logs but does not explicitly provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like arvan_task_list or other monitoring tools. No when-not-to-use or alternative context is given.

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