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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden. It does disclose what the tool returns (event name, venue, date/time, link) and the source (city newsroom announcements), but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, error conditions, or any data freshness/availability constraints beyond 'coming days.'

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 concise sentences front-load the core purpose and output fields, then expand with examples and source scope. Every sentence adds relevant information without redundancy or 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?

The tool has two required parameters and one optional parameter, all documented in the schema. The description covers return-value fields, which is important since there is no output schema, and gives enough contextual detail about the data source and event types for an agent to call it appropriately.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning, mostly reinforcing that results are for 'one city' and upcoming days; it does not clarify the edition parameter or the limit parameter beyond what the schema already states.

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: events in a city with name, venue, date/time, and link. It distinguishes itself from likely sibling city_news by focusing on events listings rather than news articles, though the main verb is implicit ('what is on') rather than explicit.

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?

Usage context is implied through phrases like 'over the coming days' and 'whatever the city's own newsroom has announced,' which suggests it covers event announcements. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose city_events over city_news or how it relates to list_cities/list_editions prerequisites.

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