yaaif_ops_session_events

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key safety trait 'READ-ONLY' and the alias relationship, which is useful. But it does not describe output shape, ordering, pagination behavior, or what 'events' actually contain.

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 compact and front-loaded with the most important signal (READ-ONLY) followed by the resource and alias. There is no filler, but it is terse enough that it sacrifices useful behavioral context.

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 tool with 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this one-line description is insufficient. An agent cannot determine what event data is returned, how session_id is interpreted, or how flags like include_raw and summary_only alter the result.

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 only 43%, and the description mentions no parameters at all. It does not compensate for undocumented params like session_id, limit, offset, or include_raw. The alias note only explains the fixed resource=events mapping, not parameter behavior.

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 the resource ('LLM session events') and marks the operation as READ-ONLY, which is specific and recognizable. The alias note ties it to yaaif_ops_telemetry resource=events, providing a clear identity, though it does not use an explicit verb like 'list' or 'get'.

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 alias statement ('Alias of yaaif_ops_telemetry resource=events') implies the agent should use this when it wants telemetry events for a session, and it names an equivalent alternative. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus siblings like yaaif_ops_session_messages or yaaif_ops_flow_events.

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