eb_event_attendee

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals this is a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying the returned data includes barcode, profile answers, and check-in state, giving the agent insight into what the response contains without contradicting the annotation.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose and appends a concise parenthetical of key returned fields. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 get-by-id tool with two well-documented parameters and a read-only annotation, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, what data it returns (barcode, profile answers, check-in state), and the schema covers the parameters. No output schema exists, but the description adequately hints at the return content.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (event_id as 'Numeric event id', attendee_id as 'Numeric attendee id'), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds little beyond what the schema provides, mainly confirming the attendee belongs to an event. This aligns with the baseline of 3.

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 ('Get one attendee of an event by id') and specifies the resource and scope. It also lists key fields (barcode, profile answers, check-in state) that distinguish it from sibling tools like eb_event_attendees (plural) and eb_org_attendees.

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 usage for retrieving a single attendee when the attendee_id is known. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the singular 'one attendee' and mention of 'by id' provides clear context that this is for specific attendee lookup, differentiating it from listing endpoints.

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