eb_event_orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: it explicitly requires organizer access to the event. This communicates an authorization prerequisite that is not apparent from the schema or annotation alone.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the core purpose and access requirement without unnecessary words. Every word contributes meaning.

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 readOnlyHint annotation and schema descriptions for most parameters, the description provides adequate context by specifying the event scope and organizer-side permission. The lack of an output schema is partially mitigated by sibling order tools, though a note about return format would have been helpful for full completeness.

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 descriptions cover event_id, continuation, and changed_since, with only the status parameter lacking a description. The enum values (all, placed, refunded) are self-explanatory, so the description does not need to compensate. It adds no extra parameter detail, but the schema carries sufficient semantics.

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 lists a single event's orders, using the specific verb 'List' with a precise resource scope. It also notes 'organizer-side', which distinguishes it from attendee order tools like eb_my_orders and organization-wide tools like eb_org_orders.

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 conveys when to use the tool: for organizer-side access to a single event's orders, requiring event access. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the scope and permission requirement imply a clear usage context and distinguish it from sibling tools.

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