churn

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the behavior for never-observed entities (returns 0, not error) and implies idempotent read-only operation. However, it does not cover permissions, rate limits, or other side effects.

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 sentences, front-loading the core action and adding a key behavioral note. Every sentence adds value with no waste.

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 (7 parameters, 2 required, nested objects) and lack of annotations, the description is insufficient. It omits details on sorting, pagination, and the window format, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to correctly invoke the 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 description mentions 'entity_refs' (via entity) and 'window', but does not explain the other 5 parameters (sort_by, sort_order, limit, cursor). Since schema descriptions have 0% coverage, the description should have compensated more thoroughly.

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 is a 'per-entity change-event count over an optional window', with specific mention of SEIs and behavior for never-observed entities. It uses a specific verb-resource combination, though it could better distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'changed' or 'warpline_entity_churn_count_get'.

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 lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives or prerequisites, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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