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

Annotations already cover readOnly/destructive, and the description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: the newest-first ordering, the draft semantic ('no guests sent yet'), and the auth requirement (Cotlet API key with app access). This is meaningful behavioral disclosure rather than repetition.

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?

Front-loads the resource and return behavior before the chaining and auth notes. Slightly padded by the title-style opening ('Paperless Post: Your Cards and Flyers from My Events...'), but every sentence carries usable information.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully characterizes the return (cards/flyers, ordering, included fields) and covers the auth prerequisite. Adequate for a low-parameter list tool; only the deeper pagination semantics are left to the schema.

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 limit, cursor, and the status enum are already documented in the schema. The description mentions send status and drafts but adds no syntax, defaults, or filtering nuance beyond what the schema provides, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List events' / 'Returns the Cards and Flyers on your account, newest first') and clarifies what the items represent. It names the event_id as a link to other endpoints, which distinguishes it from get_event, though it does not explicitly name the sibling.

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 clear chaining guidance ('Use the event_id of each item in the other endpoints') and a useful note that drafts have no guests sent yet, which helps decide when to filter by status. No explicit when-not or named alternative is given, so it stops short of a 5.

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