find_events

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 conveys that this is a read-only lookup over the Dalamud API and what domain it covers, but says nothing about result limits, pagination, caching, or whether the index must be refreshed (relevant given the `refresh_cache` sibling).

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?

Two tight sentences with the core verb and scope front-loaded, no filler. Slightly redundant in that the second sentence restates the nouns from the first.

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 two-parameter, zero-required finder with fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers intent and domain adequately. Return-shape detail is absent but the description does name the categories of objects returned.

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 100% and the enum values for `kind` are fully explained in the schema, including the default. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already documents, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (find) and resource (event-related types and delegate subscription points), plus concrete examples of what is located (EventArgs classes, event enums, delegates). It is clear what the tool does, though it never distinguishes itself from the sibling `search`/`search_members`, which likely cover similar ground.

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?

"Useful for locating EventArgs classes, event enums, and delegate types used to subscribe to framework events" implies the usage context, but no when-to-use vs. when-not guidance is given and no sibling alternative (e.g. `search` or `get_type`) is named for the non-event case.

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