get_action_timeline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the result is paginated and includes locators and timings, which is useful. However, it does not clarify ordering, defaults, or potential side effects such as downloading a trace from a URL, leaving some behavioral 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 two sentences, with the primary purpose front-loaded and no redundant phrasing. The second sentence provides practical pagination guidance, ensuring every word earns its place.

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?

For a straightforward list tool with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and pagination usage. It omits details like default ordering and the necessity of trace_path, but the schema covers that requirement, so the description is mostly complete for the tool's complexity.

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% for all three parameters, which establishes a baseline of 3. The description adds value by explicitly explaining the purpose of limit/offset for pagination ('Use limit/offset to page through large traces'), which goes beyond their individual schema descriptions.

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 states 'Returns a paginated timeline of all actions with locators and timings,' which is a specific verb and resource with clear scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_trace_summary or get_causal_chain_for_failure, which target different aspects.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when you need the full action timeline with locators and timings. The phrase 'Use limit/offset to page through large traces' directly guides handling large results. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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