get_rrweb_events

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It successfully warns about potentially several MB of data, which is a critical behavioral trait for an agent to anticipate performance and cost implications.

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 exceptionally concise: two short bilingual sentences with a clear warning icon. Every word adds value 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 no output schema, the description should clarify the output format (e.g., structure of events) and any limitations (e.g., pagination). It omits these details, which is a notable gap for a tool returning potentially large data.

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 single parameter report_id is already documented. The description does not add any additional context or constraints for this parameter beyond its existence.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: retrieving full rrweb DOM events. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool get_rrweb_summary by emphasizing that it returns complete data rather than a summary, and the size warning adds specificity.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('only when need precise analysis of DOM changes') and warns about large data size, guiding the agent to consider alternative lighter tools (like get_rrweb_summary) for less demanding needs.

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