ingest_bizevents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the operation is a WRITE and lists requirements, but does not cover side effects, response behavior, error handling, rate limits, or idempotency. For a data-ingesting tool, this is insufficient.

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 concise sentences. The first sentence states purpose and endpoint; the second lists requirements and fields. No unnecessary words, well front-loaded.

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 simplicity of the tool (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers purpose, prerequisites, and field details. It lacks explanation of response or error behavior, but overall adequate for an ingest 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?

There is only one parameter 'bizevent' with a minimal schema description. The tool description adds substantial value by enumerating required CloudEvent fields (id, source, specversion, type) and optional fields, which is not present in the schema itself.

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 verb 'Ingest', the resource 'business event (CloudEvent)', and the target endpoint 'POST /api/v2/bizevents/ingest (WRITE)'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ingest_events and ingest_logs by specifying 'bizevents'.

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 mentions prerequisites (DT_ENABLE_WRITES=true and token scope) and required/optional fields, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternative ingest tools. No mention of when-not to use it.

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