List event names

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety and side-effect profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds useful domain context (these names are what actually fire, so they are safe to reference in triggers), but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or scale of the returned list — leaving gaps the annotations do not fill.

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?

Front-loaded with bolded section labels (Purpose / Not for / Returns / Use when) that make it scannable, and every sentence carries information. Minor redundancy between the Purpose line and the Returns line ('distinct event names' stated twice) keeps it just short of a 5.

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?

For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema list tool, the description covers everything an agent needs: what it lists, what the values mean, what it is not, and when in a workflow to call it. There is no unaddressed complexity to compensate for.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain and the baseline of 4 applies. Nothing in the description misleads about arguments.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the distinct event names that have been tracked') and immediately gives the semantic role of the result: valid values for workflow triggers and segment filters. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the nearest sibling by naming plunk_list_activity_types as the tool for delivery activity types.

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?

Has an explicit 'Use when' clause ('Before building a workflow trigger or an event-based segment filter') and an explicit 'Not for' exclusion that routes the agent to plunk_list_activity_types. Both the affirmative and negative cases are covered.

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