get_event

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

Discloses read-only nature, section selection via include, and behavior of not returning details if not participating. While no annotations exist, description covers key behavioral aspects sufficiently.

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?

Description is concise with clear sentences and bullet-pointed section list. Front-loaded with main action. Slightly verbose due to Japanese spacing but still efficient.

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 description partially compensates by listing sections and hinting at content (event description, story, clues, metrics). However, specifics of each section's content are not detailed, leaving some ambiguity.

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%, so baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining the purpose of include (selection) and default behavior (all sections), and listing available sections.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves event information for ongoing events, using the verb '取得する' (get) and resource 'イベント情報'. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying when to use create_post and search_post.

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 labels tool as 'read-only' and provides two alternative tools for write operations (create_post) and searching (search_post). Also notes behavior when user is not participating, guiding appropriate use.

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