pretalx_get_schedule

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'fetch and summarise', which conveys a read-only action but omits details such as what the summary includes, how include_raw affects the output, or any side effects. This is a significant transparency gap.

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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words, making it easy to scan. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices informative content, though conciseness itself is not penalized.

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 the lack of annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description is too sparse to provide complete context. It does not clarify how this tool relates to sibling tools like pretalx_list_schedule_sessions or pretalx_find_schedule_conflicts, nor does it explain parameter effects. The existence of an output schema is acknowledged, but the description still leaves critical gaps.

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 0%, and the description mentions neither 'event' nor 'include_raw'. It fails to explain what 'event' refers to (e.g., an event slug) or the purpose and effect of 'include_raw'. The description adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema's types and defaults.

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 'Fetch and summarise the current schedule for an event' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool's primary function. The word 'summarise' distinguishes it from sibling tools like pretalx_list_schedule_sessions, which likely provides raw session listings.

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 implies usage when a summary of the schedule is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions. No reference to sibling tools or context is provided, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate use case.

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