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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: every event was checked against the organizer's own site, and results include venue, prices, audience, rationale, deadlines, and links.

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 tightly packed sentences with no filler. The purpose and scope are front-loaded, followed by result-content details that help an agent decide whether to call it.

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 description covers the tool's purpose, provenance, and result contents, while the rich input schema covers the 11 optional parameters and annotations cover safety behavior. It does not mention paging or default date behavior, but the schema supplies those details.

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 91%, so the schema already carries most parameter meaning. The description adds a useful summary of filterable dimensions (sector, place, date, price, keyword), but does not explain sort, limit, offset, open_only, or date-bound nuances beyond what the schema 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?

States a specific verb and resource: find upcoming commercial real estate conferences for 2026-2027. It also names the filter dimensions (sector, place, date, price, keyword), but does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as compare_events or recommend_for_role.

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 is implied by the filter-oriented phrasing, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus compare_events, get_event, recommend_for_role, or upcoming_deadlines. No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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