get_entity_events

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this is a safe read, so the safety bar is largely covered. The description adds useful behavioral context about relative pagination and the 'selected' focus mode, but says nothing about ordering (direction, newEventsOnTop) or result size despite those being behavioral concerns.

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?

Single sentence with a parenthetical, front-loading what the tool returns before the pagination detail. Efficient and no wasted filler, though the parenthetical is dense.

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 7-parameter tool with no output schema and 43% schema coverage, the description is too thin: it omits the semantics of direction, newEventsOnTop, and perPage, which an agent needs to paginate an event list correctly.

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 only 43%, so the description must compensate, but it only paraphrases 'from' and 'selected' which the schema already documents. Undocumented parameters (perPage, direction, newEventsOnTop, entityId) receive no explanation, leaving half the meaningful inputs unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: it returns the event history of a project, portfolio, or goal, and the entity types are enumerated. It's clear and self-contained, though it offers no explicit differentiation from any sibling tool.

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 parenthetical gives implied usage for pagination (pass last event id as 'from', or focus with 'selected'), which is a usage hint. But there is no statement of when to call this versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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