list_runtime_events

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

The read-only hint is confirmed in the prose ('Read-only operation'), and the description adds meaningful behavior beyond the annotation: the runtime store is optional, the operation fails without the UNIFI_RUNTIME_ENABLED flag, and the result is capped by `limit`. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 compact and front-loaded: the resource and operation are stated in the first sentence, then prerequisites and related tool guidance follow. Every sentence adds useful information without redundancy.

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?

For a single-parameter read-only list operation, the description covers the resource, the limit parameter default, the enabling prerequisite, and the related status tool. With readOnlyHint already annotated and no output schema required, nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 100%, and the only parameter `limit` is already fully documented in the schema as 'Maximum number of events to return. Defaults to 100.' The description repeats this without adding extra meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific action ('List') applied to a specific resource ('normalized events retained by the optional runtime store'), making the tool's scope clear. It also differentiates from event-related siblings by emphasizing the runtime store, so an agent can distinguish it from get_recent_events or poll_events_now.

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 gives clear context: it is read-only, returns up to a limit of normalized events, and requires UNIFI_RUNTIME_ENABLED=true. It also points to get_event_polling_status as the related tool for seeing source feeds, but does not explicitly explain when to prefer this over alternatives like get_recent_events.

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