recent_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it reveals that returned values are real log lines rather than templates, are ordered newest first, and that any severity is included. It also discloses the practical WARN-vs-ERROR logging behavior. It could mention rate limits or exact time-window behavior, but the core behavioral traits are communicated.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: it starts with the core behavior, gives concrete use cases, explains filtering options, and ends with a crucial caveat. No filler or repetition.

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 five parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and a rich sibling set, the description covers purpose, behavioral nuance, and the WARN/ERROR pitfall well. However, it omits meaning for limit and minutes, and does not describe the output line structure, which matters more because there is no output schema. The description is competent but not fully complete for invocation.

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 0% and no parameter descriptions exist, so the description must compensate. It explains service, severity, and contains (as substring), but says nothing about the limit or minutes parameters, which are significant for controlling result size and time range. The agent is left to infer their meaning from names alone, so the compensation is incomplete.

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 tool returns actual most-recent log lines in newest-first order, distinguishing it from pattern/template tools and from recent_errors by emphasizing 'ANY severity'. The use cases 'what was the latest X' and 'show the actual line' make the purpose concrete and 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?

It gives explicit guidance on when to use this tool (latest events, actual lines, payment/auth/timeout events) and provides a strong exclusion: for loose errors, do NOT set severity=ERROR since those usually log as WARN; filter by service or contains instead. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the context is clear enough for selection.

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