Get VWO workspace timeline

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond the annotations (e.g., no mention of rate limits, side effects, or response format). It is consistent but adds no extra value beyond the annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose, second gives a specific usage tip. No wasted words.

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 tool has 6 parameters and no output schema, the description explains what the tool returns at a high level ('who changed what and when'). It could be improved by describing the return structure or pagination behavior, but it is mostly sufficient for a simple retrieval 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a minor usage hint about startTime/endTime for narrowing windows, but otherwise does not add meaning beyond the schema.

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 clear verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('activity timeline for a workspace'), and specifies what information is returned ('who changed what and when'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like vwo_get_workspace (which gets workspace details) and vwo_list_workspaces (which lists workspaces).

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 provides guidance on when to use startTime/endTime ('when investigating a specific change'). It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use, but the context is clear for a read-only history tool.

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