Get Events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not mention pagination defaults (limit/offset), the default exclusion of hidden events, or anything about result volume, but with annotations doing that work a 3 is the baseline rather than a failure.

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 three-word sentence has zero filler and nothing buried, but its brevity is under-specification rather than conciseness — it omits everything an agent needs to know about scope. Front-loading is fine; content is not.

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 tool with a deeply nested 55-parameter query object, no output schema, and many overlapping siblings, a three-word description is far from complete. The schema covers parameters, but nothing explains what an "event" is here, how results are paginated, or what the default filtering (e.g. includeHidden) does.

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 100% and every one of the nested query filters is documented inline, including the tricky tag_slugs_all AND-vs-OR contrast. Baseline 3 applies: the description contributes no parameter meaning, but the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

"Retrieve all events" essentially restates the name/title (Get Events) with no added specificity. The word "all" is actively unhelpful for a tool whose schema exposes ~55 filter parameters, and it does nothing to distinguish this from siblings like get_events_by_sport_slug, get_events_by_league_slug, get_events_for_a_tag, get_event_by_id, or get_sports_events.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance whatsoever — no statement of when to call this generic event lister versus the many filtered-by-sport/league/tag siblings. The absence is significant because the sibling set is dense with near-duplicate event retrieval tools, so an agent gets no routing help.

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