import_startlist

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses that this WRITES data, alters what is published, is irreversible, and requires EVENTOR_USERNAME/EVENTOR_PASSWORD credentials. This is exactly the safety context missing from the structured fields.

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?

Front-loads the action, then the critical safety warning, then the argument and auth requirement. Each sentence earns its place; the emphasis on irreversibility is warranted for a destructive publish.

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 single-param write tool with an output schema (so return values need not be explained), the description covers purpose, danger profile, format expectations, and auth prerequisites. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly 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?

Schema coverage is 0% (the property is only titled 'Iof Xml' with no description), so the description must compensate. It specifies that iof_xml is a complete IOF XML 3.0 StartList document passed as a string, adding format and version detail the schema lacks, though not edge cases like validation failure.

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+resource ('Upload a start list to Eventor'), clearly distinguishable from the sibling import_resultlist and the read-oriented get_* tools. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the resource itself differentiates it.

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?

Explicitly states when to call it: only after the user has confirmed they want to publish this exact start list. It frames the action as irreversible and warns it is not a routine read, which is precisely the routing guidance an agent needs.

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