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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful content about the dimensions returned (gross, net, fees, royalty, quantity) and optional grouping, but says nothing about pagination, response shape, or limits on multi-event queries.

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-loaded with the resource and metric list in one dense sentence, with the endpoint appended. No wasted sentences, though the parenthetical grouping examples edge toward noise given the enum already lists them.

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 100% schema coverage and readOnlyHint, the main gap is the absence of an output schema, which the description partially compensates for by naming the returned metrics. Lacks detail on result structure per bucket, but is adequate for an 8-param read tool.

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 100%, so all 8 parameters (date_facet, period, group_by, timezone, etc.) are already documented in the schema. The description's mention of grouping and time buckets duplicates the schema rather than adding syntax or constraints.

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 ('Sales report'), enumerates the returned metrics (gross, net, fees, royalty, quantity), and adds the endpoint reference. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like eventbrite_get_attendee_report or eventbrite_list_orders without opening schemas.

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?

Use case is implied by 'report for one or more events' and the grouping capability, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to guidance versus eventbrite_get_attendee_report or the list tools. The agent must infer suitability from the metric list.

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