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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the description does not need to repeat those. It adds that events are 'live' and shown 'with their venues,' which is minor context. No contradiction with annotations, but also no substantial behavioral disclosure beyond what the annotations and schema already imply.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and a brief usage tip. It is appropriately terse for a simple listing tool, with no unnecessary filler.

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 list operation with a fully described schema, the description covers the essentials: what it lists (upcoming events), the scope (live pro-wrestling, house shows/PPVs), and venue inclusion. However, the misleading lat/lon reference and lack of mention of default behavior (e.g., sorting, pagination) leave some gaps, though annotations and schema fill in most needs.

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 tool description itself does not elaborate on any actual parameters; instead, it references non-existent latitude and longitude filters, which actively misleads. Schema descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so a baseline of 3 is warranted, but the presence of incorrect parameter guidance reduces the value of the description's contribution.

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 opens with 'List upcoming live pro-wrestling events (house shows and pay-per-views) with their venues,' using a specific verb and resource that clearly states what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_event' (singular) and 'get_tv_schedule' by focusing on listing live events.

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 explicitly tells when to use the tool ('is anything coming to my area') and how to filter, but it instructs passing 'latitude and longitude' parameters that do not exist in the input schema. This critical error makes the guidance misleading and could cause an agent to attempt invalid calls, undermining the usefulness of the usage instructions.

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