search_events

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, permissions needed, or side effects. While 'search' implies read-only, this is not explicitly stated, leaving ambiguity.

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 extremely short (3 words), which sacrifices informativeness for brevity. It fails to convey essential details, making it under-specified rather than concise.

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 the complex input schema with multiple required nested fields (expression, profileId, directoryIds, dateStart, dateEnd) and no output schema, the description is wholly inadequate. It does not explain what the tool returns or how to construct the request, leaving the agent with significant ambiguity.

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?

The input schema is fully covered in terms of field existence, but the description adds no meaning beyond 'Request body payload'. The schemas provides field names and types (e.g., 'expression' as object, 'dateStart' as date-time), but without explanations of their purpose, the agent must infer from names alone. Since schema coverage is 100%, a baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Search events instances' essentially restates the tool name, providing minimal clarity. It does not specify what constitutes an 'event instance' or how this tool differs from sibling search tools like 'search_ad_objects' or 'search_deviances_by_ad_object'.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes many search and retrieval tools, but the description offers no context for selecting this one.

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