List indexed XRC events

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

Discloses 'read-only' nature, which is important for safety. However, no annotations exist, so description should also cover pagination, sorting, or rate limits, which are absent. Does not contradict any annotations.

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 sentence, 15 words, front-loaded with verb and resource. No wasted 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?

Tool has 9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations. Description lists filter options but misses pagination behavior, response structure, and ordering. Adequate for basic use but gaps remain.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It mentions 7 of 9 parameters (owner, contract, type, action, txHash, fromBlock, toBlock) but omits page and limit. Adds meaning through natural language but lacks format details.

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?

Description clearly states 'list' action on 'XRC events' with explicit filter dimensions (owner, contract, type/action, tx hash, block range). Distinguishes from sibling list tools like list_xrc_contracts by specifying the resource.

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 with optional filters but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to sibling tools. No alternatives or exclusions mentioned.

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