event_overview

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full burden. It discloses what the tool returns (categories, doc counts, amendments) but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, error handling, or permissions. The word 'Summarise' implies non-destructive action, but safety is not made explicit.

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 extremely compact: one purpose sentence plus a minimal Args block. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no filler or redundant detail.

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 a single parameter, an output schema, and a simple use case, the description is nearly complete. Minor gaps include not clarifying the relationship with the 'amendments' sibling and not covering empty or error cases, but the essential information is present.

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?

The schema provides no description for the 'event' parameter (0% coverage). The description fully compensates by giving the expected format ('AUS-GP-2026') and a pointer to list_events for finding valid codes, adding substantial meaning beyond the raw 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Summarise') and resource ('one event') and lists outputs: categories with doc counts and amendments. It distinguishes from list_events by focusing on a single event, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'amendments' tool.

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?

Clear context implies use when a summary of one event is needed, and the 'see list_events' pointer helps locate the event code. However, there is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternative tools like 'amendments' for focused amendment details.

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