search_request_events

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds that it returns up to `limit` AtomEntry objects and describes the navigation flow (link field). This provides behavioral context beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 concise with three paragraphs: purpose, usage guidance, and examples. Every sentence adds information; no fluff. Information is well front-loaded.

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 presence of annotations and output schema, the description covers the main purpose, result shape, and follow-up steps. It lacks details on sorting or pagination, but the examples and next-step guidance make it fairly complete.

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%, so description must compensate. It explains `limit` indirectly ('Returns up to limit') and gives query examples for `search_expression`. However, it does not formally define the query syntax beyond examples, leaving some ambiguity.

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 specifies the action 'search' and the resource 'WhatDoTheyKnow's feed-based event index' to find FOI requests. It distinguishes from siblings like search_authorities and get_request_feed_items (for full detail). The verb 'Search' and resource 'event index' are specific.

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 explicitly states when to call ('find FOI requests matching a query expression') and provides next steps (use link field, call get_request_feed_items for full detail). Example expressions aid usage. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare directly with all siblings.

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