hookbase_get_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the output includes 'full payload and all delivery attempts', which adds some behavioral context beyond the basic 'get' operation. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or response format, which are important for a read operation with no output schema.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get detailed information about a specific event') and adds valuable scope details ('including the full payload and all delivery attempts'). There is no wasted verbiage, making it highly concise 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no nested objects) and high schema coverage, the description is adequate but has gaps. It lacks an output schema, and with no annotations, it does not fully cover behavioral aspects like error conditions or response structure, making it minimally complete for a simple read 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'event_id' clearly documented. The description does not add any additional meaning or context about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific event'), specifying the scope ('full payload and all delivery attempts'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'hookbase_list_events' (which lists events) and 'hookbase_get_event_debug' (which likely provides debug-specific details).

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 when detailed event information is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'hookbase_get_event_debug' or 'hookbase_list_events'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving usage context somewhat vague.

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