Generate Weekly Event Digest

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the 7-day search window and the output shape (newsletter-style summary organized by category), which is useful operational context 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 purpose and use-case sections are front-loaded and clear, but the Args block duplicates parameter information already present in the schema, so not every line 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 5-optional-parameter tool with no output schema, the description explains the return format (newsletter-style summary organized by category) and the temporal scope. It lacks routing guidance versus siblings, but otherwise gives enough to call 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 80%, so the baseline is 3. The Args section largely repeats schema descriptions and even omits the min=5 constraint on max_events and the default 'markdown' for response_format, so it adds little beyond the structured schema.

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 'Generate' and resource 'curated weekly digest of Philadelphia events', and clarifies it searches the next 7 days and formats a newsletter-style summary. The digest framing distinguishes it functionally from search siblings, but it does not name an alternative tool 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?

Provides clear use cases ('Perfect for: Weekly event roundup emails, Planning your weekend...') and a temporal context (next 7 days). It does not state when to prefer it over siblings such as philly_search_events or philly_export_to_calendar, nor any exclusions.

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