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

Annotations already declare the tool is read-only (readOnlyHint=true). The description adds behavioral context by stating it 'never extrapolates a date' and serves only 'published' entries, which is useful beyond annotations, but lacks details on error handling or response format.

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 long with no redundant words. It front-loads the core action ('Verified events for a town') and adds a critical constraint in the second sentence.

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 tool has 3 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description lacks details about parameter usage, return format, or potential edge cases (e.g., no events). This is insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool confidently.

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%, yet the description only mentions 'town' implicitly ('for a town') and does not explain the date parameters (to_date, from_date). The description fails to add meaning beyond the raw schema for any parameter.

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 the tool retrieves 'Verified events for a town' and specifies a key constraint: only entries with explicit dates are served. This provides a clear verb-resource pair and differentiates from potential sibling tools that might extrapolate dates.

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 description implies the tool should be used when needing verified events with explicit dates for a town, but it does not explicitly state when to use or not use it, nor does it reference alternative tools like search_content.

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