List reminder events

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully states that soft-deleted events and notification icon data are omitted, and its read/list nature is clear. However, it does not disclose ordering, default time-window behavior, output shape, or whether any permissions are required.

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 two sentences long and front-loads the essential purpose and filters, then adds a brief behavioral caveat. There is no redundant repetition of schema or title content.

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?

For a simple list/history tool with no required parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description and schema together cover the main invocation decisions. It could be more complete by describing the event fields or ordering behavior, but it is sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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?

All four parameters have detailed descriptions in the input schema, including defaults and allowed period formats. The description names the same filter categories but adds little semantic value beyond the high-coverage schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 identifies this as a 'History of reminder notifications that fired' with a concrete resource scope and optional filters. This distinguishes it from sibling tool list_reminders, which refers to configured reminders rather than fired notification events.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: retrieving historical reminder notification events with optional time-window, unread-only, or reminder UUID filters. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is specific enough that an agent can select it appropriately.

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