crear_evento

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), and the description adds useful behavioral details about accepted date and time formats. It does not disclose side effects, return values, or any system behavior beyond creation, but the create action is simple and reasonably transparent.

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 short sentences with no filler. The core purpose and the key formatting rules are front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 create tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description gives the essential format requirements but omits a concrete usage example, any mention of required fields (tipo, titulo, fecha), or what response to expect after creation. These are partially recoverable from the schema, so the description is adequate but not fully complete.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It explains the two most format-sensitive fields: fecha (AAAA-MM-DD) and hora (free-form, e.g., '18:00'). The other parameters are left to self-explanatory titles and enum/default values, so the compensation is partial but meaningful.

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 opens with 'Crea un evento,' a specific verb and resource, clearly identifying the action and object. It also adds format constraints for date/time, which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like ver_evento or editar_evento.

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 makes clear this tool is for creating a new event, which implicitly tells an agent when to use it versus editing or viewing existing events. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or conditions like 'use editar_evento to modify an existing event'.

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