eb_event_description

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, and the description's 'Get' is consistent. The description adds that the description is 'full HTML,' providing some sense of the return format, but it doesn't disclose behaviors like potential HTML size, escaping, or error conditions. Given the annotation covers safety, this is adequate but not rich.

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, focused sentence with no filler. It's front-loaded with the action and resource. Very concise.

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 read-only tool with one well-documented parameter, the description is fairly complete: it tells the agent what the tool returns (full HTML description). However, it lacks information about when to use it relative to sibling tools and any caveats, so it's not fully complete.

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 input schema fully describes event_id as a 'Numeric event id' (100% coverage), so the description doesn't need to add parameter details. The description contributes no additional semantic meaning about the parameter beyond the schema.

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 uses the verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'an event's full HTML description,' which is specific and clear. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like eb_event or eb_event_details, so it's not a 5.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. There's no mention of when to use this tool versus alternatives like eb_event or eb_event_details, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The description only states what it does, not when to invoke it.

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