list_port_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action and filters. It does not disclose behavioral traits like pagination (nextToken, limit), sorting, rate limits, or response format. For a listing tool with 9 parameters, this is insufficient.

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, clear sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose. It is efficient but could be slightly more structured with separate sentences for scope and filters. No unnecessary words.

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 tool has 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description only mentions filters but omits crucial context like pagination behavior (nextToken, limit), how filters combine (AND/OR), or what the response contains. For a complex tool, this is incomplete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description summarizes the filters (time, country, port, vessel, event type) but adds no new meaning beyond grouping them. It does not explain parameter interactions or advanced usage.

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 lists port events with optional filters, using specific terms like arrivals/departures and globally. It distinguishes from siblings like get_port_events_by_vessel by implying a broader scope, but could be more explicit about when to use this versus other event-listing tools.

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 on when to use this tool over alternatives such as get_port_events_by_vessel or search_port_events_by_port. The description lacks any when-not-to-use or contextual recommendations, leaving the agent to infer usage without clear direction.

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