get_next_events

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose two useful traits: read-only operation and a single API call (cost/rate-limit relevant). It stops short of explaining what 'next' means (count, time window, timezone) or pagination behavior.

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 short sentences with no filler, and the scope/grouping constraint is front-loaded. Given the tool's zero-parameter simplicity, this is appropriately sized.

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 0-param, read-only tool with no output schema, the description supplies the essentials: what is returned, how it is organized, and that it is a cheap read. It does not define the meaning or bound of 'prochains', which is the one remaining ambiguity.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline for a 0-param schema is 4. Schema coverage is 100% and no parameter meaning is missing.

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 and resource ('Liste les prochains événements'), plus the output shape ('regroupés par date'). This clearly distinguishes it from the create_event/update_event/delete_event siblings, though it never names or contrasts with any sibling explicitly.

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 explicit when-to-use statement, but none is really needed since no other sibling lists events. The description only implies usage via 'prochains événements', leaving the agent to infer that it is the canonical read path for upcoming events.

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