find_events_by_title

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It mentions searching 'across the entire Indico instance' and that results include category info, but does not disclose search algorithm (e.g., exact match vs fuzzy), rate limits, pagination, or whether it is read-only. The example implies read behavior but lacks explicit safety or side-effect disclosure.

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 composed of three sentences plus a multi-line example. It is relatively concise and front-loads the core purpose. The example adds clarity but is slightly verbose; overall, it is well-structured without wasted words.

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 has an output schema, description does not need to detail return format. It adequately covers the key use case (title search for category discovery) and how to use results with other tools. It could mention the 'instance' parameter's role in multi-instance scenarios, but overall it is reasonably 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of the results (category discovery) and providing a usage example, but does not elaborate on parameter syntax or constraints beyond the schema. Baseline 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 'Search for events by title across the entire Indico instance' and explains that results include category_id and category name, distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_events_by_keyword. It provides a concrete example showing how it helps discover category IDs.

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 indicates when to use this tool ('when you know part of the event title but not the category ID') and gives an example that demonstrates its utility. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to alternatives beyond the implicit differentiation.

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