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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns event details including title, description, timestamp, type, and custom data, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention error behavior, permissions, or any side effects, which would enhance transparency.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no filler. Every word contributes meaning, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

This is a simple retrieval tool with no output schema. The description lists the return fields, which suffices to convey the output. The schema documents the context parameter with a detailed explanation. However, it lacks mention of edge cases (e.g., not found) or how this relates to listing events, so it's not fully complete but is adequate for a simple getter.

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 67% (tagOrId and context have descriptions; uuid only has format). The description adds the fact that the tool returns 'custom data associated with the event' but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema covers most parameters.

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 'Retrieve a specific custom event by its UUID' which clearly identifies the action (retrieve) and resource (custom event by UUID). This distinguishes it from siblings like listCustomEventsForEntity, which lists events, and getCustomDataForEntity, which retrieves custom data rather than events.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as listCustomEventsForEntity or getCustomDataForEntityByKey. The description does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or relative advantages, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the tool name alone.

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