list_events

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions that the output includes document counts, which adds some context, but it omits any details about ordering, pagination, or event identification. This is adequate but not rich.

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, direct sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and scope, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 it is a zero-parameter list tool with an output schema available, the description is mostly complete. It covers the essential purpose and output, though it lacks sibling differentiation, which slightly reduces completeness.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty, so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description adds useful context by specifying the scope ('all events') and output detail ('document counts') without needing to explain parameter meaning.

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 tool's function: 'List all events in the vault with document counts.' It uses a specific verb and resource, but it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like event_overview, which may serve a similar purpose.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as event_overview, list_docs, or search. There is no mention of exclusions or preferred contexts, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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