trace_get

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

With no annotations, the description conveys that the tool is read-only and non-destructive (does not clear buffer). It mentions the ASCII timeline format but lacks details on prerequisites or potential side effects.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. It is highly efficient.

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, the description adequately covers the tool's return value (events and ASCII timeline). It could mention the return format more explicitly, but overall provides sufficient context for a simple read tool.

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 only parameter, maxEvents, is fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score applies.

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 reads events captured since trace_start and provides a pre-rendered ASCII timeline with specific symbols. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like trace_start and trace_stop.

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 explicitly notes that the buffer is not cleared and advises calling trace_stop when done, providing clear context for usage and post-processing.

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