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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so no additional safety disclosure is required. The description adds the 'proximos' temporal scope but does not describe return format or ordering, keeping it within the baseline for annotation-covered tools.

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?

A single, front-loaded Spanish sentence conveys the tool's purpose and optional filter with no filler. It is appropriately concise for a simple read-only list tool.

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 simple read-only tool with good annotation coverage, the description covers the core purpose and optional parameter usage. It could mention the limit parameter or distinguish from singular sibling, but these are not critical given the schema and sibling names.

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?

The description mentions an optional city filter, but this merely restates the schema's 'Ciudad opcional.' The 'limit' parameter is not mentioned in the description, and the schema has no description for it, so the meaning relies solely on default/min/max annotations. The description adds little beyond structured data.

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 'Lista los proximos eventos VITUR' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating a read-only listing of upcoming VITUR events. It distinguishes itself from sibling 'vitur-proximo-evento' by the plural 'proximos' and from 'vitur-buscar-eventos' by emphasizing upcoming rather than arbitrary search.

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?

The description implies its use case: listing upcoming VITUR events with optional city filtering. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for other scenarios, but the plural scope and 'proximos' provide clear context.

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