List events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds value by clarifying the scope (scheduled events, not messages or subscriptions) and the return fields. It does not mention pagination or ordering, but with the annotation covering the read-only nature, this is sufficient. No contradiction.

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 two sentences long. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose and content fields. The second sentence proactively disambiguates from similar tools. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

This is a low-complexity tool with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description covers what the tool does, what fields are returned, and differentiates it from related tools. It is fully adequate for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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% for the single optional 'guild' parameter, so the schema fully documents the parameter. The description adds no extra parameter details, which is acceptable because the schema carries the burden. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states that the tool lists scheduled community events (the kind members RSVP to) and specifies the fields included: type, time, status, and interest counts. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming list_scheduled_messages and list_event_subscriptions, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit alternatives: 'For pending scheduled messages see list_scheduled_messages; for live event subscriptions see list_event_subscriptions.' This tells the agent when to use this tool versus related siblings, effectively conveying the usage context.

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