eb_event

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about public event access and how to identify event IDs, but does not discuss rate limits, errors, or the shape of the response beyond what the schema might imply.

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 two concise sentences. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the additional clarification about public events and ID extraction is efficient with no wasted words.

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 simple retrieval tool with two parameters, annotations, and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains the target resource, access scope, and ID identification. It does not explicitly describe the return value, but this is often implied by the tool name and nature of the 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 adds extra meaning for event_id by explaining that the trailing digits in an event URL correspond to the ID, which is valuable guidance beyond the schema's 'Numeric event id'.

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 tool fetches an Eventbrite event by ID, with the specific verb 'Get' and resource 'Eventbrite event'. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by noting it works for any public event, not just the user's own, and provides concrete guidance on extracting the event ID from a URL.

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 implies when to use this tool: for any public event, not just those owned by the user. This differentiates it from organizers-specific siblings, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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