get_artistOne artist and where they are playing next: their upcoming festival appearances with dates and locations.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| artist | Yes | Artist name or URL slug. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hint | No | ||
| note | No | ||
| error | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| artist | No | ||
| source | Yes | ||
| didYouMean | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish that the tool is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral scope by specifying that only upcoming festival appearances are returned, with dates and locations, which meaningfully narrows the expected response beyond what annotations state.
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 one concise sentence that front-loads the key distinction ('One artist') and then clarifies the result. There is slight redundancy between 'where they are playing next' and 'upcoming festival appearances,' but overall it is tight and information-dense.
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 single-parameter read-only lookup with an output schema and clear annotations, the description covers the essential scope well. It does not mention error or not-found behavior, but the low complexity and existing structured metadata make the description sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.
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 single parameter is fully documented in the schema with its type and meaning (artist name or URL slug). The description adds essentially no new parameter-level detail beyond calling this the target artist, so the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage is appropriate.
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 identifies the resource (one artist) and the specific output (upcoming festival appearances with dates and locations), making the tool's purpose obvious and distinct from broader search or festival-level tools. It does not explicitly name a sibling tool, but the singular artist focus is enough to prevent obvious confusion.
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 when to use this tool: when you need a single artist's next festival appearances. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling tool to prefer instead, such as search_artists for fuzzy lookup or whats_on for broad discovery.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource or query type: artist details, festival details, lineups, set times, and searches. The only potential confusion is between search_festivals and whats_on, since both can find festivals by date, though their descriptions clarify the different default uses.
Most tools follow a clear get_/search_ verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_artist, search_festivals). The outlier is whats_on, which breaks the pattern and uses a phrase without an underscore, but it is still understandable and not disruptive.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a festival and artist information server. Each tool covers a meaningful aspect of the domain without redundancy or bloat.
The surface covers the core domain well: finding artists and festivals, retrieving festival details, lineups, and schedules, plus a what's-on-view. As a read-only information service, create/update/delete operations are not expected, and there are no obvious dead ends.