GoaTech canonical event catalog

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

With no annotations, the description takes on full burden. It discloses that system events are auto-emitted (should not be tracked), and that customer events appear under customer_events. Does not mention any side effects or permissions, but for a read-only catalog tool this is sufficient.

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 moderately detailed but each sentence serves a purpose: defining the return, giving usage guidance, and explaining parameters. It could be slightly more concise, but it's well-structured and front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (canonical + custom events) and categorizes them. It does not specify the exact structure of the returned events, but for a catalog tool this is likely sufficient context.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the category enum values (e.g., system events are auto-emitted) and clarifying the default for include_customer_events. This extra context helps the agent make informed choices.

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 returns merged canonical and custom events, with a specific verb 'Returns' and resource 'events'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on event discovery rather than campaign or destination management.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call this BEFORE writing any new track() callsites. Provides guidance on using canonical names instead of custom ones, and mentions filtering to avoid context bloat. This is a clear when-to-use directive.

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