what_changed_last_24h

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds value by specifying the full range of event types included (alerts, target flaps, failed checks, security bans, expiring certs, backup issues). It does not mention pagination or response format, but the output schema exists and this is a read-only tool with minimal behavior.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the main operation ('Get a unified timeline'), followed by a concise list of included event types. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

The tool is simple: one optional parameter, read-only, with an output schema available. The description sufficiently communicates the purpose and content coverage. The parameter schema explains the time window, and annotations capture safety. Nothing critical is missing.

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 100%: the only parameter 'hours' is fully described with its default value. The tool description does not add any further parameter explanation, but the schema fully covers it, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource: a unified timeline of recent events across the homelab. It enumerates specific event types (alerts, target flaps, failed checks, security bans, expiring certs, backup issues), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like what_needs_attention or get_homelab_overview.

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 implies when to use this tool (to see a unified timeline of recent events), but it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternative tools. There is no exclusion guidance, but the context is fairly clear from the description.

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