List visits

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so safety is covered. The description adds the underlying endpoint (GET /visit/) and the shape of the result set, which is useful, but says nothing about pagination semantics, volume, or rate limits beyond what the schema already states.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the resource and result shape front-loaded before the filtering detail. Slightly dense packing of filter information into one sentence but still readable and appropriately sized.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does describe the composite structure returned, which is the main thing an agent needs. It stops short of documenting pagination/continuation behavior (next_page) that matters for a list endpoint, leaving a small gap.

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 every parameter is already documented at the schema level, including defaults, ranges and the redaction behavior of include_contact_details. The description's mention of the buffer and time filter merely restates those parameters, adding no format or edge-case detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource and goes further by enumerating the returned composition (event, performance, ticket items, transaction with reference/lead booker/status). This clearly separates it from get_visit (single visit) and the list_events/list_performances siblings.

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 explains what can be filtered (upcoming/past plus a buffer window) but never says when to choose this tool over get_visit or the other list_* siblings, nor any prerequisite or context of use. Usage has to be inferred from the name.

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