eventstream_get_definition

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses meaningful behavioral details: it is long-running, it writes files to a specified directory, and it returns the list of files written. The 'writes definition files' language does not contradict the readOnlyHint because the write targets an output directory rather than mutating the eventstream resource.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, flags the long-running nature, then states the side effect and return value, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 simple three-parameter tool with strong annotations, the description covers the key operational expectations: it is long-running, writes files, and returns the list written. It does not elaborate on file formats or timeout behavior, but nothing critical is missing for invoking the tool 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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already documented. The description adds little beyond confirming that outputDirectoryPath is where files are written; it does not enrich parameter semantics further, 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 and resource: 'Get the definition of an eventstream.' It also distinguishes this from the sibling eventstream_get by noting the behavior of writing definition files to an output directory and returning the list of files written, making the tool's unique role clear.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the behavior implies it is for exporting definition files, it does not mention eventstream_get or eventstream_update_definition as related choices, nor does it state any exclusions or prerequisites beyond what the schema already provides.

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