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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive). The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the canceled-event inclusion behavior and the authentication requirement ('Needs the user's Cotlet API key with access to this app').

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 opening 'Evite: Invitations you host, from My Invitations' is partly redundant with the following 'Lists the events in your My Invitations,' restating the same scope twice. The remainder is efficient and front-loaded, but the first sentence doesn't fully earn its place.

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?

Covers the essentials for a read-only list tool: what it returns (date and status), the canceled-event nuance, the event_id handoff to other endpoints, and auth requirements. With no output schema, the description adequately implies the return shape without full detail.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description goes further by explaining the status=canceled behavior and why it matters (to find an event to reinstate), adding meaning beyond the raw enum.

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?

States a specific verb (Lists) and resource (events) with clear scope: 'the events in your My Invitations' that 'you host.' It distinguishes itself from single-event siblings like evite_get_event by framing the listing scope, though it doesn't name an alternative explicitly.

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?

Gives concrete usage context: canceled events are included when requested 'so you can find one to reinstate,' and directs the agent to reuse 'event_id from each item in the other endpoints.' No explicit when-not or named alternative, but the workflow is clear.

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