events_list_users

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

The annotations cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description correctly avoids repeating that. It adds valuable details about pagination cursors and the return shape, which are behavioral traits not captured in 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 description is concise and well-structured with bold section headers. Every sentence earns its place: purpose, when to use, pagination, and return format. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's read-only nature, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, usage context, pagination behavior, and return format. An output schema is present, so detailed field explanations are not required. Missing permission/error details are minor for this simple list operation.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the pagination semantics and limit range, but does not introduce additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The return format is helpful but not parameter-related.

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 action ('List users subscribed (RSVP)') and the resource ('scheduled event'), making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like events_list or events_get. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description includes a dedicated 'When to use' section explaining the primary use case (inspect attendance/interest). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool appropriately.

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