evite_get_event

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates safety, and the description adds that the response includes event, settings, location, and more. This is useful but does not detail return format, pagination, or potential errors, so it adds moderate context beyond annotations.

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, leading with the core purpose and then providing the endpoint and content highlights. Every word is informative, with no waste 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context: it names the tool's action, resource, and likely return contents. It does not explain error handling or full response structure, but for this scope, it is nearly 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 single parameter event_id is fully described in the schema (100% coverage), including its source. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves a single Evite event detail, using the specific verb 'Get' and naming the resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like evite_list_events by specifying 'single' event, and includes the API endpoint for additional clarity.

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 the tool is for fetching one event by ID, and the parameter description mentions the ID comes from evite_list_events, which is a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or provide any exclusions.

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