get_app_endpoint_traces

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states the basic action without disclosing behavioral traits such as read-only nature, rate limits, data freshness, or response structure. This leaves significant gaps for agent decision-making.

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: one sentence plus an Args block. The main sentence is front-loaded. The Args block, while somewhat redundant with the schema, aids quick comprehension.

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 an output schema available, the description need not explain return values. However, it lacks usage nuance (e.g., time range limits, result set size). The 4 required parameters are fully listed, but the description does not set expectations for what constitutes 'recent' or how results are ordered.

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%, but the description includes an Args section that adds type and brief descriptions for each parameter (e.g., 'The ID of the Scout APM application'). This compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions, though it does not cover all details like allowable formats.

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 retrieves recent traces filtered by app and endpoint, using specific verbs and resource names. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like get_app_trace (singular) and get_app_error_groups.

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 (e.g., get_app_trace for a single trace). Usage is implied from the description but not stated.

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