get_events

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the burden. It explains date_from default behavior and username resolution but omits whether the operation is read-only, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error handling.

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?

Structured with a clear 'Args' block, front-loaded with the main verb. Reasonably concise, though the parameter list could be slightly shorter without losing clarity.

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?

Covers parameters well, and since an output schema exists, return values are not needed. However, lacks usage guidance and behavioral context, making it only minimally complete for an agent to decide when to invoke.

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 0%, yet the description adds meaning to all 7 parameters, including default for max_results, date_from defaults to last 24h, and internal resolution of username. Lacks enum values for event_type but is otherwise helpful.

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', specifying the verb and resource. It lists several filters (event_type, username, etc.) and distinguishes from siblings like get_admin_events by focusing on general events.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get_admin_events for admin events, get_login_failures_by_ip for IP-specific failures). The description only lists parameters without usage context.

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