cigchat_list_custom_events

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does mention the required OAuth scope, which is valuable, but does not disclose pagination behavior, filtering semantics, or the fact that the operation is read-only. The GET method is implicitly shown in the endpoint, but no explicit safety characteristics are 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 extremely concise, with two pieces of information: the action and the auth requirement. Every sentence earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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?

The description lacks critical context about what 'by flow' means—how the flow is identified and whether it is implicitly tied to the token. It also omits any indication of the response format, which would be important for a list operation. While the schema documents parameters, the absence of flow-context guidance makes the description incomplete for an agent.

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 100%, so the parameters (name, page, limit) are fully described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning to these parameters, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get list') and resource ('custom events by flow'), and includes the exact API endpoint, making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes from sibling list tools by specifying the resource type.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cigchat_flow_custom_events_data or cigchat_flow_custom_events_summary. The only usage-related note is the required 'Manage Flow' scope, which is a prerequisite rather than a usage context.

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