get_event

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Get details.' It does not state that the operation is read-only, whether authorization or campaign context is required, what response format to expect, or any side-effect profile.

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 brief but under-specified. 'Get details of a event' has a grammar error and provides no useful structure or distinguishing information; it is not appropriately sized for a tool with two required parameters and many siblings.

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?

The tool has no output schema, no annotations, two required parameters, and numerous sibling tools, yet the description offers only a near-tautology. There is not enough contextual information for an agent to reliably select and invoke this tool correctly.

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%, and the description does not mention or explain the two required parameters, id and campaignId. While the parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Get details of a event' is essentially a tautology of the tool name get_event. It adds only the word 'details' and does not specify what is included, how it is scoped, or how it differs from other get_* sibling tools.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use get_event versus list_events or any other sibling tool. No alternatives, exclusions, or usage conditions are mentioned, so an agent must infer when this tool is appropriate.

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