replay

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

The description declares the tool as read-only, which is the primary behavioral trait. Since no annotations are provided, this disclosure is essential and sufficient. It also notes the output format (one line per event with timestamp and type). However, it does not mention any other potential behaviors like rate limits or performance characteristics, but given the simplicity, a score of 4 is appropriate.

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 three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the tool's action, providing usage context, and noting its read-only nature. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 only one optional parameter, no output schema, and a clear purpose, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, and its behavioral safety (read-only).

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 input schema covers the single parameter 'limit' with a description ('Number of most recent events to show. Defaults to 30.'), achieving 100% coverage. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is applied.

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 specifies the verb 'Print' and the resource 'chronological timeline of recent Agentpack ledger events', listing event types. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly mentioning that this is for auditing when resume is insufficient and not part of the routine load_context/checkpoint loop.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('to audit how the task history unfolded when a resume is not enough') and when not to use it ('not part of the routine load_context/checkpoint loop'), providing clear guidance on alternatives (resume, load_context).

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