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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/non-destructive semantics, and the description adds genuine context beyond them: weeks run Monday–Sunday, picks cluster Thursday–Sunday evenings, times are Pacific, each pick is joinable via a table of up to six strangers, and app_url is the join link. That is real operational detail an agent could not infer from the 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?

Front-loaded with the action, then triggers, then scope, then return shape, then the sibling hand-off – a sound ordering. It runs slightly long with conversational framing ('where can I meet people this weekend'), but almost every clause carries 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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by enumerating what comes back – venue, neighborhood, Pacific time, price tier, tags, short description, organiser page, app_url – plus date ordering. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the description still adds meaning by clarifying that a 'week' is Monday–Sunday and that Los Angeles is the current default city. It does not expand on accepted week-id formats or when to prefer json formatting, leaving a little on the table.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get Buffet's curated lineup of real-life events and hangouts') plus explicit scope (one week, one city). It immediately separates itself from buffet_search_events, so an agent can distinguish the two without opening either schema.

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?

Gives concrete trigger phrasings ('what's going on in LA this week / this weekend', 'things to do in Los Angeles') and names the alternative with the exact condition that selects it: use buffet_search_events to filter by day, neighborhood, price or interest.

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