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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, so description adds value by stating 'you must be a host' and explaining that the fields object holds entity-specific details like milestone fields.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose. The first sentence is long but necessary to list entities. No redundant 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?

Given no output schema and 6 parameters, the description adequately covers the creation action, requirements, and field usage. Could mention return value or success indication, but overall complete.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining name, optional status, notes, and the fields object with an example (milestones {target_date, category, phase}). It does not detail event_id or entity beyond listing, but provides solid meaning.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: creating a production item in any area of a live event, enumerating entities. While it does not distinguish from siblings directly, it explicitly says 'USE THIS for milestones — a milestone is NOT a task,' offering some differentiation from task creation tools.

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 provides clear context on when to use: for any entity type listed, and requires event_id, entity, name, and host status. It hints at not using for tasks by noting milestone ≠ task, but doesn't fully specify when not to use or list alternatives.

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