thruk_incident_timeline

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only mentions it returns an 'ordered event chronology' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, potential side effects, or permission requirements. It is vague about what events are included.

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 very concise—two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word adds value, including the French term for context.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the timeline contains (event types, fields) and how the return value is structured. It does not, leaving the agent with insufficient information to interpret the output.

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 coverage is 100%, and the existing schema descriptions are good. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. It introduces the term 'analysis window' for since/until but otherwise adds no new parameter semantics.

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 that the tool provides an ordered event chronology for a host, service, or hostgroup, with a specific use case (post-mortem analysis). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like thruk_list_alerts or thruk_recent_events.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not explain when to prefer this over thruk_list_alerts or thruk_state_diff. The description only states what it does, without contextual usage hints.

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