Update Luma event

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

Annotations indicate write, non-destructive, idempotent operation. Description adds the confirmation requirement, which is helpful. However, it doesn't disclose potential side effects like notification triggers or permission requirements, missing a bit of depth.

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 sentences, no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second sentence adds critical usage guidance. Efficient and well-structured.

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?

No output schema, so return value is unknown. With 17 parameters including nested objects (geo_address_json), the description should mention the response format or key parameter interactions. It does not, leaving significant gaps for a complex mutation tool.

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 0% with 17 parameters; description does not explain any parameter beyond the name. The tool needs to describe key parameters (e.g., event_id, confirmed) or group them, but it doesn't, leaving the agent to infer from schema alone.

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?

Title and description clearly state 'update' on 'Luma event', distinguishing it from create_event, get_event, etc. The verb and resource are explicit.

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?

Explicitly states 'Call only after showing the changes and receiving explicit confirmation.' This provides clear when-to-use and a safety constraint, implying it should not be called without user approval.

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