get_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains parameter behaviors (e.g., date_from defaults to last 24h, username resolved internally, ip_address is client-side filter). However, it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, authentication requirements, or rate limits, leaving some gaps.

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 structured with a clear lead sentence followed by a detailed args list. All sentences are informative, but the list format is slightly verbose. It is front-loaded with the purpose, which is good.

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?

The description covers parameters well and output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool among many similar siblings and does not mention any limitations or edge cases.

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 compensate. It explains all 7 parameters with additional context such as default values, internal resolution, and filter nature, providing significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 'Get KeyCloak events with optional filters', using a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like get_admin_events, but the name and context make the purpose reasonably clear.

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 description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_admin_events or get_password_update_events. It lists filters but does not explain the appropriate context or conditions for selecting this tool.

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