List reservation events

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

With no annotations, the description provides side effects ('none beyond database reads'), output types, and failure modes, fully disclosing behavioral traits.

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 well-organized into labeled sections (Purpose, When to use, Inputs, Side effects, Output, Failure modes), making it easy to parse and front-loads key information.

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 tool has an output schema, the description appropriately covers purpose, usage, side effects, and failure modes, leaving no critical gaps for an audit list operation with optional parameters.

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% with detailed descriptions. The description merely summarizes inputs ('optional workspace, reservation kind, action filter, and limit') without adding new semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 states 'Inspect audit history for reservation lifecycle events' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools focused on reservation creation, release, or renewal.

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?

Explicit 'When to use' section lists specific scenarios (conflict analysis, stale reservation cleanup, team coordination review). It lacks explicit 'when not to use' but provides clear context.

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