get_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. The description lists the returned fields but does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, auth requirements, or error handling. However, the name 'get_event' implies a safe read operation, and the description adds value by detailing the output.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the purpose and lists the fields. It is efficient but slightly long; could be split for readability. No 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?

For a simple 'get' tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (title, description, date/time, etc.). It does not cover edge cases or error responses, but these are less critical for a retrieval operation.

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 coverage is 100% with a single 'url' parameter described. The description adds the same example as the schema, providing no additional semantics. Baseline score 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 verb 'get' and resource 'detailed information about a specific mountaineers.org event', and specifies the method 'by URL'. It lists the fields returned, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'search_events' which searches for events.

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 implicitly tells when to use this tool: when you have a specific event URL. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the sibling list includes 'search_events' for finding events without a URL, providing context.

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