get_group_future_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses behavioral traits like the public-group requirement and pagination via cursor, but lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling. The information is helpful but incomplete for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and key constraints in three concise sentences. Each sentence adds useful information (purpose, access rule, pagination), with no wasted words, though minor improvements in flow could make it a 5.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0 parameters, the description covers essential aspects like purpose, access rules, and pagination. However, it lacks details on return values, error cases, or performance limits, making it adequate but with clear gaps for a tool that might handle complex event data.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds value by mentioning the cursor for pagination, which is an implied parameter not in the schema, earning a score above the baseline of 3.

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 states the tool's purpose as 'Get group future events,' which is a clear verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'page_events' or 'search_events,' leaving ambiguity about when to use this specific tool versus alternatives.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: 'Only PUBLIC groups can be scrapped! If there are no post response, check if group is not private.' This clarifies when the tool works (public groups) and troubleshooting steps, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or specify when not to use it.

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