tie_search_events

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavioral traits. It implies a read-only search operation but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, what authentication is required, or any rate limits. It lacks information about pagination, result size limits, or side effects, leaving gaps for an AI agent.

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 well-structured with a brief opening line and a bulleted list of arguments. It is largely efficient, though some examples (e.g., 'e.g. "2026-07-01T00:00:00.000Z"') add length without clutter. Could be slightly more compressed but still clear.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers input semantics well but omits the return value or result structure. An agent invoking this tool would know what to provide but not what to expect in response, which is a notable gap.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does so thoroughly: directory_ids references resource='directories', date_start/end with ISO 8601 examples, profile_id with default, expression and order with defaults and example values. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 'Search AD security events within a date range', which is a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('AD security events'). It distinguishes from siblings like tie_alerts or tie_search_ad_objects by specifying security 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?

The description explains what the tool does but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives (e.g., tie_search_ad_objects) or when not to use it. The usage context is implied by the date range and security events focus, but no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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