List agent events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: page ordering, the direction each cursor walks, the returned cursor names (next_after_sequence/next_before_sequence), and precedence of before_sequence — none of which annotations supply.

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?

Front-loads the return shape, then covers the two pagination directions efficiently with no filler sentences. The second half is dense and reads slightly like a run-on, but every clause carries pagination semantics.

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?

Pagination behavior is well covered, but with no output schema the description still never says what an 'event' contains, and the three required identity parameters are undocumented in both schema and description. Adequate for paginating, incomplete for interpreting results.

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 coverage is 50%, so the description must compensate. It adds the precedence rule ('before_sequence takes precedence over after_sequence') and the cursor-output relationship beyond what the schema states for after_sequence/before_sequence. It does nothing for the three required identity parameters (agentID/orgID/projectID), which remain pattern-only.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (returns one page of agent events) plus the ordering guarantee (chronological within the page), which is clear and unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like agents_interactions_list or other list tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Gives clear operational context for two usage modes: forward pagination via after_sequence and backward pagination via before_sequence, plus the precedence rule. It never states when to prefer this tool over alternatives or any exclusions, so it is clear context without routing guidance.

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