list_conversion_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden, and it does disclose important traits: events are 'sampled,' results are capped at 50 per call, and a pid is required. It does not discuss pagination beyond the cap, ordering, or authentication, but for a read-style list tool these are fairly minor omissions.

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 three short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The core action and scope appear first, followed by the limit and use case, making it easy for an agent to scan and act on.

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?

The description is adequate for a basic list call since it covers the resource, required pid, and limit. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not clarify the meaning of ad_account_id, pagination behavior beyond 50, or what fields the sampled events contain, leaving the context incomplete.

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?

The description adds little meaning beyond the schema: 'requires pid' and 'Up to 50' merely restate the required pid and max limit already present in the input schema. The ad_account_id parameter has no schema description and no explanation in the description, leaving a real semantic gap unaddressed.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'List recent sampled conversion events for a pixel,' immediately scoping to conversion events rather than pixels. It also states the key prerequisite ('requires pid') and gives a distinct use case ('verify ingestion'), which separates it from sibling tools like list_conversion_pixels.

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?

It provides a clear intended context: 'Use to verify ingestion from bzr.openai.com.' It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name an alternative tool, so it falls short of a perfect 5, but the stated use case is specific enough to guide selection.

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