nps_events

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation. The description adds value by listing the returned fields and noting the optional park code filter, but it does not disclose additional behavioral details such as pagination behavior or how 'upcoming' is defined. It neither contradicts nor substantially extends 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 concise and efficiently structured, with three short sentences that front-load the main purpose, then state return fields and filtering option. No redundant or wasteful wording.

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 list tool with two optional parameters and full schema coverage, the description is complete. It includes the essential return fields, the key filter, and the read-only nature (via annotation). No output schema exists, but the described return fields suffice.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema: it highlights the park_code filter as optional, but the schema already describes both parameters adequately with examples and defaults.

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 gets upcoming events at national parks, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('upcoming events at national parks'). It distinguishes from sibling NPS tools like nps_parks, nps_alerts, and nps_campgrounds by focusing on events and mentioning returned fields.

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 when to use the tool (for events at national parks) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusionary conditions. There is no guidance on when not to use it versus other NPS tools, so the usage context is clear but not fully articulated.

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