whats_onFestivals happening in a window: this weekend by default, or a calendar month. Filter by country or genre.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| when | No | "this-weekend" (default) or a month as YYYY-MM. | |
| genre | No | Genre. | |
| limit | No | Max results, 1-25. Default 10. | |
| country | No | Country name. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| source | Yes | ||
| window | Yes | ||
| festivals | Yes | ||
| totalMatches | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/non-destructive behavior. The description adds the default 'this weekend' behavior and the calendar-month option, which are not available in the annotations and affect how an agent invokes the 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?
The description is two compact clauses that front-load the core purpose and then give the default and filters. No filler or repetition.
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 no required parameters, a 100%-documented schema, and an output schema, the description plus annotations cover what an agent needs: purpose, default window, and filter options. No critical behavior 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all four parameters. The description's mention of country/genre filters adds no meaning beyond those schema descriptions, so 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?
The description clearly identifies the resource (festivals) and the distinguishing time-window scope ('this weekend by default, or a calendar month'), which separates it from the sibling get_* and search_* tools. It lacks a leading imperative verb, but the meaning is unambiguous.
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 conveys when to use it: to see festivals in a time window, with optional country/genre filters. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it misses the top tier.
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.