events_create

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying the return object shape and noting that creator_id is absent for events created before October 2021. Annotations already indicate it is not read-only and not idempotent, so the description complements rather than contradicts.

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?

Concise and well-structured with bold section headers (Purpose, When to use, Entity types, Returns). Every sentence carries useful information without redundancy or padding.

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 12-parameter tool with nested objects, the description covers purpose, usage, entity-type constraints, and return format. Combined with high schema coverage and annotations, it provides sufficient context for an agent to select and invoke 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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats entity type requirements already present in the schema (e.g., channel_id required for STAGE/VOICE) and does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema documents.

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: 'Create a new scheduled event for a guild.' It also lists entity types, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like events_list, events_get, events_modify, and events_delete.

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 a clear 'When to use' section: 'Schedule a stage, voice, or external event in a guild.' It gives contextual constraints for entity types but does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives, which is acceptable for a create operation.

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