List events

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation, lowering the bar. The description adds context ('timeline activity') and indicates filters exist, but does not disclose pagination behavior, default ordering, or response structure, which are relevant for a list tool.

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. However, it is arguably too terse given the tool's complexity: 9 optional parameters and no output schema mean more detail would be justified while still remaining concise.

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?

With 9 parameters, no output schema, and minimal schema descriptions, the description does not provide enough context for an agent to understand response shape, pagination, or how filters interact. The readOnlyHin lowers safety concerns, but informational completeness is still 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 only 22%, and the two provided schema descriptions are value lists, not explanations of purpose. The description's generic 'with filters' does not map to any specific parameter, leaving 7 parameters completely unexplained. This is insufficient compensation for the schema gap.

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 'List account events (timeline activity) with filters' clearly identifies the operation (list) and resource (account events), adding the clarifying term 'timeline activity'. It distinguishes from siblings like kommo_events_get by using 'list' rather than 'get', but does not explicitly contrast with kommo_events_types.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kommo_events_get or kommo_events_types. The phrase 'with filters' implies filtering capability but does not explain filtering use cases or exclusions.

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