release_event

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context by explaining that the event returns to the unprocessed pool without settlement and becomes immediately available to another worker, which is meaningful beyond the annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action, effect, and benefit without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool.

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 simple one-parameter schema, existing annotations, and an output schema, the description is largely complete for purpose and behavior. The main gap is the lack of detail about the event_id parameter and any error conditions, but no major operational information is missing.

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 single required parameter event_id has no documented format, constraints, or meaning in the description. While the name implies a claimed event identifier, the description adds no semantic detail beyond what the schema already shows.

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 a specific verb and resource: returning a claimed event to the unprocessed pool. It also distinguishes itself from settling tools like complete_event by saying 'without settling it,' so an agent can identify its distinct role.

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 gives clear context for use: release a claimed event so another worker can pick it up immediately instead of waiting for the lease to lapse. It does not explicitly name when to use a sibling like complete_event instead, but the implied alternative is clear from 'without settling it.'

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