recent_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only implies a read operation ('拉事件明细') and says nothing about permissions, return format, pagination, or what happens with the limit parameter. Key behavioral traits are undisclosed.

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 a parenthetical hint, so it is very concise. However, the parenthetical is cryptic and the overall terseness may leave the reader unsure of the exact scope, slightly undermining the structure.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and two parameters at 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'events' are, what the return contains, or how the parameters work, leaving significant gaps for correct invocation.

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 both parameters (limit and since_id) are undocumented in the schema. The description only vaguely references 'id', which does not clarify the meaning of either parameter, especially limit, and provides no syntax or interaction guidance.

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 states a specific verb ('拉' fetch) and resource ('事件明细' event details) with a scoping condition ('按 id'). It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish this tool from its siblings (report_done, situation_report, focus_change), so it falls short of a 5.

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 '管家要细节时才用' provides a usage condition (use only when the steward needs details), which implies a context. However, it names no alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer when this tool should be chosen over siblings.

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