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

Adds real value beyond annotations: 'Sends no email' and the POST /InsertEvent endpoint are not in the structured fields, and the non-idempotency warning explains the consequence ('calling twice creates two events') rather than just restating idempotentHint=false. Doesn't state the return value, though there's no output schema to cover that.

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 dense paragraph, front-loaded with the verb and required fields, then optional fields, then behavioral caveats. Every clause carries information; nothing is padding.

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 9-param create tool with no output schema, the description covers optionality, defaults, timezone handling and side effects well. The main gap is that it doesn't say what the call returns (presumably the new event id), which the agent needs to chain into follow-up calls.

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 coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3, but the description adds the default for waiver_form_ids ('WaiverFile's own choice') and reiterates the UTC requirement, which the schema only conveys per-field. No added syntax detail beyond the schema.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Create a waiver event') with a parenthetical defining what a waiver event actually is (a class, tour or session that collects waivers), which disambiguates it from waiverfile_create_event_category and waiverfile_update_event. Required inputs are named up front.

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?

Gives clear context for use and points to waiverfile_list_waiver_forms for the default form-selection behavior, with the schema also cross-referencing waiverfile_list_event_categories. It doesn't explicitly say when to use update_event instead of create, but for a create tool the guidance is otherwise strong.

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