get_page_events

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. It reveals the API endpoint and that it's a read operation (GET), but does not disclose pagination behavior (beyond 'after' and 'limit' params), rate limits, or what happens if no events exist. It does not contradict annotations since none exist.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes the endpoint URL for clarity. It is concise and efficient, but lacks any elaboration on usage or parameters, which is a minor shortfall given the low schema coverage.

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 moderate complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain parameter semantics, pagination, or error cases, and there are no annotations. The missing information is essential for correct invocation, particularly for 'after' which is a pagination cursor.

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 explain any parameters. The schema itself has 3 parameters with defaults but no descriptions, leaving agent with no semantic meaning for 'after', 'limit', or 'page_id' beyond names. The description adds nothing beyond the schema.

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 states 'List events hosted by the Page' with a clear verb and resource, distinguishing it from page posts, feed, and other content tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_page_posts or get_page_insights, though the resource (events) is specific enough.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no comment on prerequisites (e.g., needing credentials or a valid page_id). The context signals show no annotations either, leaving the agent without usage context.

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