isir_tok_udalosti

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers the key behavioral trait: omitting od_id starts at the last ID and returns only the newest events, plus an enumeration of returned event fields. It omits any mention of auth requirements, rate limits, or what davek controls, so it is not fully complete.

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?

Front-loads purpose and scope, then layers in return fields and the filter. Dense but every sentence carries information; the return-field enumeration is slightly verbose given an output schema exists.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be spelled out, yet the description does describe returned fields anyway. Together with the usage routing and od_id semantics, the agent has enough to call it correctly; only davek remains undocumented.

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% for 3 parameters, so the description must compensate. It clarifies od_id semantics (ID > od_id; no od_id = newest only) and the jen_spisova_znacka filter format ('INS 1000/2024'), but leaves davek entirely unexplained.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource (event stream of the whole registry) and pins the underlying web service (ISIR_PUBLIC_WS, WS_1). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling isir_udalosti by stating this is not for single-proceeding queries.

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?

Directly states the intended use (monitoring changes) versus the excluded use (targeted queries on one proceeding) and names the alternative tool isir_udalosti for the latter. Also explains the od_id default behavior and the filter's purpose.

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