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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that teasers are sanitized, availability is conditional ('when available'), and detailed context is not included. It does not mention read-only behavior or what occurs when no teasers are available, but the zero-parameter surface limits the risk.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the core action and scope, with no filler or repetition. Every phrase adds value.

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 parameterless tool, the description adequately covers purpose, output type, conditionality, and the free/paid boundary. It could add return-structure or availability details, but the description is largely complete for correct invocation.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter-specific explanation is needed, and the description does not introduce conflicting or redundant parameter information.

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?

The description clearly states the tool shows a free EventEdge market preview and sanitized live-edge teasers when available, specifying the verb and resource. It communicates the free preview scope and paid boundary for detailed context, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'catalog' tool.

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 implies the tool is for free previews and notes that detailed context is paid, suggesting it is not for full-detail retrieval. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of the 'catalog' sibling or provide exclusions beyond the paid context.

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