Get seat map

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, it discloses a genuine operational trait: each marketplace captured is one billed Tickets.dev capture, which matters for cost-aware invocation. It also flags that capacity is only present 'where the marketplace gives one', warning of partial data. No detail on failure modes for unsupported marketplaces.

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 compact sentences: the first front-loads exactly what is returned, the second carries the billing caveat. No filler, and the cost note is separated so it is easy to scan.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the work of naming the return fields (SVG URLs, per-section all-in price, capacity). What it still leaves open is response shape — whether results are grouped per marketplace or per section, and whether sections without maps are omitted.

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 coverage is 100% for the single 'url' parameter with its own description ('One marketplace event page URL'). The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on URL format variations or what happens if the URL is not an event page — so the 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 names the concrete resource set: per-section seat maps as SVG URLs, cheapest all-in price per section, and venue seat capacity for an event. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_listings and compare_prices by its map/geometry focus, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

Usage is only implied — an agent infers it is for when seat-map visuals or per-section pricing are needed. No when-not-to-use condition and no pointer to compare_prices or get_listings as alternatives for pricing-only questions.

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