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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description usefully adds sorting order, the pagination shape returned (total/page/pageSize), and the underlying endpoint. It does not mention rate limits or auth requirements, but for a read-only list tool this is solid added context.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the most important scoping information (your events, newest first) leads. The trailing endpoint reference is slightly incidental but cheap.

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 read-only, filterable list tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers filtering, ordering, and pagination response shape well. Region override behavior (override_location) is left entirely to the schema, which is a minor gap.

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 five parameters are already documented. The description restates the concepts behind in_future_only and since but adds no format, default, or boundary detail beyond the schema, so the 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 and resource ('List your events') and adds scope details (newest first, dates, ticket types, pricing, capacity). The possessive 'your events' implicitly separates it from the sibling humanitix_list_global_events, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Explains the two filtering modes ('upcoming events or events changed since a date'), which tells an agent when the in_future_only and since parameters are relevant. No explicit when-not or named alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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