get_app_error_groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose important behavioral traits such as: whether the tool requires specific authentication, pagination behavior, or what happens if date range parameters are omitted (they are required but not explained). The missing from_ and to parameters are critical for safe usage.

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 short but includes a redundant Args list that duplicates schema info without adding value. It fails to mention key parameters (from_, to), indicating poor scoping. Conciseness is undermined by incompleteness.

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 an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. However, it still fails to document all input parameters (missing from_, to) and does not account for the conflict between 'recent' and required date ranges. Essential context is absent.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It lists three parameters (app_id, endpoint_id, error_group_id) but neglects the two required parameters from_ and to. While it clarifies optional filters, the omission of vital time range parameters severely limits its usefulness.

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 identifies the action (get) and resource (error_groups for an app), and mentions optional filters. However, it omits the required date range parameters (from_, to) present in the schema, which are essential to understand the scope of data returned. The phrase 'recent' conflicts with the explicit time range parameters, reducing clarity.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., get_app_endpoint_traces, get_app_trace). There is no mention of appropriate contexts, prerequisites, or alternatives. The description is purely functional with no usage strategy.

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