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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about what happens on an unknown slug or unsupported city (error vs empty result), whether any auth is needed, or what a returned gig contains. The one behavioral fact conveyed — that the city must be a supported one — is already enforced by the schema enum.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler, and the verb and scope are front-loaded. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 simple two-parameter read with no output schema, the description covers the essential contract but leaves the failure mode (invalid slug or unsupported city) and the shape of the returned gig unspecified. Adequate, with visible gaps that a slightly longer description would close.

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%: both params have descriptions and the city param enumerates all 23 supported values. The description's wording ("by its slug," "within a supported city") simply restates that, adding no new meaning such as slug format, case sensitivity, or whether slugs are city-scoped or global.

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 ("Get one gig") plus the scoping constraint ("by its slug within a supported city"), which is enough to distinguish a single-item fetch from the sibling search_gigs_and_events. It does not name that sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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?

No when-to-use guidance: nothing says to call this only when a slug is already known, or to fall back to search_gigs_and_events when it isn't. The only hint of usage is the phrase "one gig," which an agent must infer means a direct lookup rather than a search.

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