Query Audit Events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces that it is an 'audit query' (read-only) and adds 'advanced' context, but no further behavioral details are needed beyond 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loads key information (advanced audit query, filters), and includes a usage guideline without any redundant 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?

Given the presence of output schema and annotations, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. It could be more detailed on what constitutes audit events, but the output schema likely fills that gap, so completeness is good but not perfect.

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% with comprehensive descriptions for all 8 parameters. The description does not add additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 it is an 'Advanced audit query' with filters by action/time/target, and distinguishes itself from the sibling 'memory_activity' by directing normal users there.

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?

Explicitly says 'For normal users prefer memory_activity', giving clear guidance on when to use this tool vs the alternative.

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