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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, lowering the bar. The description adds real value beyond them: time-ordering of results, and the content of each entry (answer status, waitlist, sign-ups so far, own answer). 'Read only' slightly restates readOnlyHint but the ordering and content detail are additive.

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?

Front-loads the core promise, then the category enumeration, then usage and routing. The long enumeration sentence earns its length by telling the agent what the list contains, though it is dense.

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?

With annotations covering the safety profile and an output schema handling return structure, the description completes the picture: what triggers it, what it contains, and which tools answer the items. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Only one optional parameter (days) with 100% schema coverage, so the schema already documents the 1-30 range and default. The description's 'what's on this week' loosely implies a short horizon but adds no format or semantics beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('Everything coming up... in one list, in time order') and enumerates the exact categories included: plans/meetups, channel events signed up for, events own channels host, and club sessions. This distinguishes it from narrower siblings like list_plans, read_schedule, or 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?

Names the trigger scenario ('what's on this week?') and routes follow-up actions to vote_plan and rsvp_event. It lacks explicit when-not guidance versus sibling listing tools such as list_plans or read_household_calendar, so it stops short of a full 5.

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