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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope details ('last week', 'one entry per event') but does not disclose response format, timezone handling, or event detail 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?

One concise sentence states the resource, scope, and output granularity immediately. There is no filler or redundant restating of the title.

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 read-only tool with one optional parameter, rich annotations, and clear scope. The description covers the time window and result granularity; absence of output schema is partially mitigated by the straightforward nature of the tool, though return field details would improve completeness.

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 single optional 'hours' parameter is fully described in the schema (integer up to 168), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra semantic meaning or default behavior, which is acceptable given the schema already provides the necessary detail.

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 identifies the tool as retrieving live events transcribed by Helious, specifically Fed pressers and briefings, with one entry per event. It states the resource and scope, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_fed_roster or get_market_context.

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 use for recent transcribed live events within the last week, which gives clear context for when to call this tool. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives, but for this narrow read-only tool the context is sufficiently clear.

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