evite_rsvp_summary

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

With readOnlyHint=true already revealing the safety profile, the description adds a little context by saying the summary is derived from the event guests endpoint. It does not describe pagination, staleness, or other behavioral traits, but it is not misleading and does not contradict 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 two short sentences that front-load the core purpose and then add a single piece of contextual provenance. There is no filler or repetition of schema information.

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 read-only summary tool with complete parameter documentation and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description adequately conveys the response content (RSVP counts with adult/kid breakdown). It could be more explicit about the return shape, but it is enough for an agent to select and call the tool correctly.

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 provides 100% coverage of event_id and view, including a detailed explanation of compact vs full response shapes. The description itself adds no parameter syntax beyond what the schema already documents, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get the RSVP summary for an Evite event' and enumerates the summary dimensions (yes/no/maybe/noReply plus adult/kid head counts). This makes it distinguishable from siblings like evite_rsvp (a write action) and evite_list_guests (raw guest details).

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 gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings; 'Derived from the event guests endpoint' hints at a data source but does not say when to use the summary instead of evite_list_guests. No exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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