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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully extends this by listing the returned fields and flagging 'price as published' as raw data, but says nothing about behavior when the id is unknown or about the language-linked page URLs.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the resource and scope, then lists the return contents with zero filler. Nothing can be removed without losing information.

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 two-parameter detail tool with no output schema, listing the returned fields is exactly the right compensation, and annotations carry the safety profile. Only the lang parameter's effect and the not-found behavior remain uncovered.

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 50%: lang is documented in the schema, while id has only a pattern and no description. The description partially compensates by stating where the id comes from ('from search_events'), but it never explains id format or what the lang parameter changes, so it adds only modest meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Names a specific resource and scope ('Full details of one event by id') and enumerates what comes back (time, venue, price, description, page URLs, original listing). It also distinguishes itself from search_events by noting the id originates there, though the phrasing is nominal rather than a verb-led statement of action.

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?

'(from search_events)' gives clear context: call this after a search to expand a specific result. There is no explicit when-not guidance or mention of the other siblings (list_venues, upcoming_big_nights), so it stops short of full routing instructions.

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