speechwire_list_schematic_events

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, authentication, or rate limits. It only describes the return structure but does not mention safety or side effects. The read-only implication is weak.

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 concise (two sentences plus return format) and front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence is informative without redundancy.

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?

While the description covers the core functionality, it lacks context on pagination, ordering, or filtering. For a list tool with no parameters, missing these details limits completeness, though the output schema description helps.

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?

No parameters are present, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add meaning to parameters, and it correctly omits them.

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 lists all schematic events (debate/speech groupings) with rounds. It uses specific verb 'list' and resource 'schematic events', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'speechwire_list_groupings' which may refer to different groupings.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'speechwire_get_round_schematic' or 'speechwire_list_groupings'. The description does not mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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