search_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, paginated, or what happens when no parameters are provided. It also does not mention permissions or rate limits, leaving significant gaps.

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 long, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no redundant information. Every word serves a purpose, making it highly efficient.

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 four optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain behavior with empty parameters, pagination, ordering, or response structure. For a search tool, this is insufficient for an agent to use it effectively without guessing.

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 descriptions for all four parameters. The description adds general context ('by artist ID or venue ID') but does not provide additional detail beyond the schema, such as how the parameters interact (AND/OR) or format requirements. 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 the tool searches for events by artist ID or venue ID, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_artist' and 'search_venue' by focusing on events. The phrase 'Search for events by artist ID or venue ID' is precise and unambiguous.

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 gives explicit context: use this to find events so you can update them (e.g., change venue). This provides a clear use case. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternatives like 'get_by_id' if the event ID is known, so it lacks exclusions.

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