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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and closed-world scope, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the auth requirement ('Requires sign-in') and the shape of what is returned (dates, times, venues, dress codes, descriptions).

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?

Two tight sentences with zero filler, and the primary purpose is front-loaded before the auth note. Every clause carries information the agent can use.

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, single-parameter list tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the auth requirement and enumerates return fields, which is enough to call it correctly. It omits any note on result ordering or whether an empty list is possible, but nothing essential is missing.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%; the schema already explains that wedding_id is required only when the account has multiple weddings. The description's phrase 'the selected wedding's events' loosely aligns with this but adds no syntax, format, or selection semantics. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 concrete verb (lists) and resource (the selected wedding's events) plus the specific fields returned (dates, times, venues, dress codes, descriptions). This is clearly separable from the other list_* siblings, but it does not explicitly name an alternative or route the agent, so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer it should call this to view events rather than add/update/remove them. The only stated condition is 'Requires sign-in', which is an auth prerequisite rather than when-to-use guidance. No exclusions or alternatives (e.g. get_day_of_timeline) are mentioned.

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