audit_list

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

The description implies a read operation but fails to disclose any behavioral traits (e.g., time range, sorting, permissions). With no annotations, the description should provide more transparency but does not.

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 extremely concise (4 words) but at the cost of informativeness. It does not front-load key details; it simply restates the tool name's intent.

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 simple schema (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description still fails to provide essential context such as the meaning of 'recent', the effect of the limit parameter, or the return format. It is incomplete for effective tool selection.

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 has one parameter 'limit' with no description, and schema coverage is 0%. The description does not explain what 'limit' does or how to use it, leaving the agent completely uninformed.

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 lists audit log entries (verb+resource). It is specific enough but lacks nuance like what 'recent' means. No sibling differentiation needed as there is no other audit tool.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives or when not to use it. The description offers no context for decision-making.

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