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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It adds a useful boundary by noting that tickets must be purchased on the event's own web page, but it does not describe output shape, ordering, pagination, or any explicit read-only side-effect expectations.

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 short, front-loaded, and structured by clear Spanish and English sections. Every clause adds relevant information; there is no fluff, tautology, or unnecessary detail.

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 low-complexity tool with three optional filters and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns exists, where it comes from, how to filter, and that purchase happens externally. Minor gaps remain such as explicit ordering or result-field list, but they are not critical for successful use.

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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage for all three parameters with bilingual descriptions. The text restates the filter dimensions (text, city, days) but adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond what the JSON schema already provides.

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 explicitly names the resource ('eventos públicos próximos' from directory businesses) and describes searchable event types (concerts, fairs, shows). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like buscar_negocios or ver_promociones.

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?

It clearly states the intended use: find upcoming public events from the directory and optionally filter by text, city, or days. It does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for a simple search tool.

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