get-events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'optional filters' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination (implied by retrieveCount), rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens with missing parameters. This is inadequate for a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema.

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 at 4 words, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 5 parameters, 60% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't compensate for the gaps in behavioral transparency or parameter understanding, leaving the agent with insufficient context for effective tool invocation.

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 60%, with 3 of 5 parameters having descriptions. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'optional filters' but doesn't explain parameter interactions, defaults, or semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given moderate schema coverage.

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 'Retrieve events with optional filters' clearly states the verb ('retrieve') and resource ('events'), and mentions the optional filtering capability. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools (which are webhook/email related), though this may not be necessary since they serve different domains.

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. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, context for filtering, or relationships with sibling tools like list-webhooks, leaving the agent to infer usage scenarios.

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