seatgeek_trending

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

Annotations are not provided, but the description does add behavioral context: it returns SeatGeek's proprietary 'trending near you' feed, which is geo-personalized and mirrors the homepage. It doesn't mention what the output format is, pagination, or any rate limits. This is a minor gap, but the description goes slightly beyond a bare statement.

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 one sentence, immediately states the purpose, and front-loads the key differentiator ('geo-personalized'). There's no filler. This is well-structured and concise.

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 simple tool with two required parameters, the description is adequate. It doesn't have an output schema, but the description gives enough context for what the agent can expect. Some might argue it could mention that it returns a list of events or how many, but that's not critical. It's complete enough for the use case.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptive parameter names ('lat' and 'lon') and each has a one-word description. The description doesn't add anything about the parameters beyond what schema provides, but since coverage is high, the baseline is 3. No extra semantic info is given, but it's not needed.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource ('SeatGeek's trending-near-you events') and clarifies it returns the geo-personalized feed from the homepage. This clearly distinguishes it from other seatgeek tools like seatgeek_search or seatgeek_events_near, which are also siblings.

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 implies usage: it returns trending events for a coordinate, and mentions it's the same as the homepage's feed. While it doesn't explicitly say when NOT to use it or name alternatives, the context is clear enough for an agent to understand it's for geo-personalized trending. However, no explicit exclusion is given.

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