edit_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the mutation nature and a scope limitation, but does not detail side effects, authentication needs, or error conditions. The merge behavior for externalIds is a positive addition, but overall transparency is adequate but not rich.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and a key constraint. No wasted words; every sentence is meaningful. Parameter hints are embedded in the schema, keeping the description concise.

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 complex 17-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but has gaps. It does not explain return values, partial vs. full update behavior, or error conditions. The schema covers parameter details, but overall behavioral context is lacking.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by providing context (e.g., 'Only works for AI-created or community events') and usage hints (e.g., 'use search_venue to find correct venue first'). These additions improve parameter semantics beyond the schema alone.

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 'Update an existing event' with verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like create_event, delete_event, and other edit tools. It also specifies a constraint (only for AI-created or community events), making the purpose highly specific.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (to update an event) and a notable constraint (only AI-created or community events). It also includes parameter-level usage hints (e.g., 'use search_venue to find correct venue first'), but lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives for other event types.

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