List events

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It reveals default filtering and returned fields, but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or discuss side effects, rate limits, or prerequisites. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Single, well-structured sentence. Action first, then defaults, then return fields. No extraneous words; every piece of information earns its place.

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 simple list tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: default filtering and return fields. Missing a statement about read-only nature and possible pagination (though limit is in schema). Nearly complete.

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 67% (public_only and upcoming_only have descriptions). The tool description adds context about default behavior and return fields, but does not clarify the limit parameter beyond schema constraints. The added value is moderate.

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 the tool lists CiviEvent events, specifies default behavior (upcoming only), and enumerates returned fields (id, title, type, dates, flags). It distinguishes from sibling tools like civicrm_list_entities (generic) and civicrm_register_for_event (write).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, if advanced filtering is needed, civicrm_api4 might be more appropriate, but that is not mentioned. The description only states defaults and return fields without usage context.

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