search_events

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds that it searches a combined catalog from Ticketmaster and SeatGeek and supports filtering, which supplements annotations without contradicting them.

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 two sentences: first defines scope and source, second gives usage guidance. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy or fluff.

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 the tool's 5 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and sibling tools covering other travel needs, the description fully equips an agent to understand purpose, parameters, and when to invoke it.

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%, and the description essentially re-lists parameters (city, date range, category, keyword) with examples. It adds marginal value by providing example values for category and keyword, but does not significantly enhance what the schema already provides.

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 it searches live events (concerts, sports, theater, etc.) in a city, explicitly listing event types and data sources (Ticketmaster + SeatGeek). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_activities or search_dining.

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 second sentence explicitly advises using this tool 'when the user wants tickets to a concert, a sports game, a Broadway show, or any live event during their trip.' It provides clear context for use but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives.

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