List Scaleway Audit Trail system events

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

Goes well beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false) by disclosing permission requirements, default time window (24 hours vs API's 1-hour default), cursor-based pagination with no total_count, and a specific error scenario (permissions_denied). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. Information is front-loaded: purpose, sibling differentiation, permissions, defaults, pagination. Every sentence earns its place.

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 complexity of audit trail event streams and the 6-parameter schema (fully described), the description covers all critical aspects: what the tool does, how it differs from siblings, permission requirements, default behavior, pagination mechanics. No output schema exists, but the description adequately manages expectations about cursor-based pagination. Complete for an agent to use correctly.

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% (all 6 parameters have descriptions), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the combined default time window (24 hours, pinned explicitly), the pagination caveat for max_pages, and the default ordering. This contextualizes the parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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 lists system events (actions by Scaleway's own systems), explicitly naming the two sibling tools (scaleway_audit_list_events and scaleway_audit_list_authentication_events) and distinguishing by event source. Verb 'List' and resource 'system events' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: describes the tool as the third event stream for system actions vs API activity vs authentication. Includes a troubleshooting note about the required AuditTrailReadOnly permission and directs to scaleway_iam_set_policy_rules to grant it. Also explains default time window and pagination behavior.

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