hec_query_events

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states events are returned with remediation actions, but does not disclose pagination behavior (scrollId hinted but not explained), rate limits, or default behavior when no filters applied. Read-only assumption is implied but not confirmed.

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?

Single, dense sentence that front-loads the purpose and key capabilities. No extraneous 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?

Reasonable for a query tool with 8 parameters and no output schema. Describes main filter axes and return of remediation actions, but lacks explanation of pagination (scrollId) and default result set. Could also clarify if response includes count or metadata.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description lists filter dimensions (type, state, severity, date range, SaaS platform) which map to schema, but does not clarify logical operators between filters (AND/OR) or default values for optional parameters.

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?

Clear verb 'Query' and specific resource 'Checkpoint Harmony Email security events'. Lists event types and explicitly mentions returning events with remediation actions. Distinguishes from sibling tools like hec_get_event (single event) and hec_search_emails (different resource type).

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?

Implies usage for querying security events but does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like hec_get_event or hec_search_emails. No when-not or comparison to siblings provided.

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