recent_crowdsec_decisions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns data (implying read-only), but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as data recency, pagination, latency, or authentication requirements. The word 'active' hints at state filtering but lacks elaboration.

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 short sentence, making it concise. However, it is under-specified—it lacks important details like the meaning of 'active' or how the window parameter affects results. Conciseness is not a virtue if it sacrifices clarity.

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 and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the return data looks like, how 'active' is determined, or what happens when no window is provided. For a tool with only one optional parameter, this is a critical gap.

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 description coverage is 100% with a clear description for the 'window' parameter ('Lookback window such as 15m, 6h, 24h, 7d.'). The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 verb 'Return' and the resource 'active CrowdSec decisions', making its core function understandable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'decision_inventory' or 'recent_crowdsec_alerts', lacking specificity about what 'active' means or how it filters.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as 'decision_inventory' or 'recent_crowdsec_alerts'. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or use cases, leaving the agent without decision-making criteria.

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