public_events_list

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool is public and requires no login, which is helpful. However, it doesn't confirm read-only nature, pagination details, or other side effects. The description is minimally adequate but not thorough.

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?

Single sentence front-loads the purpose (public catalog, no login). No wasted words. Efficient and immediately scannable.

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?

Given 7 optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides minimal context. It doesn't describe return format, pagination behavior, or how results are ordered by default. While the schema covers parameters, the tool's overall behavior is underdescribed.

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 high (86%), so the description adds little beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. The tool description does not explain the filtering or sorting semantics in more detail. With high schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it's a public catalog of published events (B2C discovery without login). The tool name and description effectively communicate its listing purpose and distinguish it from sibling tools like public_events_get (single event) and public_events_availability.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like public_events_get or public_events_availability. The context implies it's for browsing/discovery, but lacks direct differentiation or usage constraints.

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