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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: it returns matches with a venue_id, requires a full location for Bandsintown recommendations, and requires the user's Cotlet API key with app access. It does not mention pagination or result limits, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 front-loaded with the tool's core purpose, then proceeds through result behavior, fallback guidance, attachment requirement, and authentication. Every sentence contributes actionable information with no noticeable 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 two-parameter read-only search tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, return values, fallback behavior, downstream usage requirements, and auth needs. Nothing essential for correct invocation or interpretation appears to be 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 already documents query as venue name and city as an optional narrowing field. The description confirms the name-and-city search intent but adds no syntax, format, or constraint details beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: find/search a Bandsintown venue by name and city, returning matches with a venue_id. It distinguishes this from sibling tools by explaining the venue-attachment use case and the fallback to create_event when a venue is not listed.

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?

It gives explicit context for using this tool: attach a venue to an event. It also names the alternative path clearly: if the venue is not listed, pass custom_location to create_event instead. This covers both the primary use case and the condition for switching to a sibling tool.

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