Get B2match event

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds two useful signals beyond them: the data is 'public' (scope of what is exposed) and it 'works without login' (no auth prerequisite). It does not discuss rate limits, error behavior, or payload size, keeping it short of a 5.

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 sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then the routing rule and the auth note. No filler and no repetition of the tool name or title.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, enumeration of returned content, entry-point sequencing, the alternative tool, and auth requirement. Nothing an agent needs before calling it is missing.

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 single 'event' parameter is documented at 100% coverage in the schema, including that it accepts a URL, slug/euid, or numeric id. The description's 'resolve an event' phrasing only loosely gestures at that flexibility and adds no format or precedence detail beyond the schema, 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?

States a specific verb (fetch) plus the exact resource and its returned fields: event metadata, dates, registration window, login methods, navigation menu paths. It also names the sibling it is not (list_my_events), so the agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Explicit sequencing guidance: 'Start here to resolve an event before calling the other event tools,' plus a named alternative for the joined-events case. That is when-to-use, when-to-use-something-else, and ordering all in one place.

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