agentbus_poll

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses 'at-least-once delivery', a useful behavioral trait, but does not mention idempotency, destructive actions, or safety guarantees. For a poll tool, more transparency (e.g., is it read-only?) would be expected.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, but this brevity comes at the cost of omitting parameter semantics and usage guidance, which could have been included.

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's complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, siblings to distinguish), the description is incomplete. It does not explain when to poll vs. check status, or how the cursor mechanism works. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe returns, but other context is lacking.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It fails to explain how parameters relate to the 'after cursor' operation. 'since_id' is likely the cursor, but this is not clarified. The description adds no meaning beyond parameter names.

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 'fetch' and the resource 'events', and the phrase 'after cursor' implies pagination. It distinguishes from siblings 'agentbus_publish' (write) and 'agentbus_status' (state query), making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, when-not to use, or how it relates to polling vs. status checks. The cursor concept is implied but not explained in context.

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