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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes the safe-read profile, so the description is not burdened with safety disclosure. It adds the concrete filter expression syntax and the underlying endpoint, which is useful context, but says nothing about pagination behavior or the shape of results beyond what the schema implies.

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 action, followed by dense but relevant filter examples and the endpoint. No wasted sentences, though the example list is somewhat heavy relative to the single-sentence intent.

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 six-parameter list tool with full schema coverage, a readOnly annotation, and no output schema, this is largely complete: the filter semantics are clarified and the resource is stated. Missing only edge context like pagination limits or what an empty result implies, which the schema partially covers.

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 genuine value by demonstrating valid filter expression syntax (e.g. "IsUpcoming eq true", "StartDate gt 2026-01-01", "Tags in [workshop]") that the schema only gestures at. This helps an agent construct a valid filter without guessing at operators.

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 ('List events') that clearly distinguishes it from the singular get_event sibling, but does not explicitly name or contrast with any alternative tool. The endpoint reference (GET /accounts/{accountId}/events) reinforces the read scope.

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 provides filter syntax examples but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus get_event or list_event_registrations, and no prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is left largely to inference from the tool name.

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