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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that city defaults to Lodi, CA and that only served cities are valid, but says nothing about how far ahead 'upcoming' reaches, sort order, or whether results are paginated — meaningful gaps for an unannotated tool.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, followed by the sibling distinction. The event-type examples earn their place by clarifying what counts as an event versus a program.

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 read-only listing tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers scope, defaults, and disambiguation well. It stops short of stating the time horizon of 'upcoming' or the ordering of returned events, which an agent would need to interpret results.

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 100%, so all three parameters (city, limit, category) are already documented, including defaults and the category vocabulary. The description only restates the city default and does not add new semantic detail such as slug format or limit interaction, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (list upcoming family events), scopes it to a city Kyds Activities serves, and enumerates concrete event types (open houses, workshops, storytimes, sports clinics). It also explicitly disambiguates from search_programs, so an agent can pick it without opening a 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?

The description gives a clear when-to-use signal and names one alternative with the distinguishing condition (search_programs = ongoing classes vs. single-day/short-window events). It leaves other near neighbours unaddressed, such as parent_my_upcoming_events for the caller's own saved events or program_events_feed.

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