pretalx_list_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only mentions a compact form, which hints at output shape but doesn't disclose pagination behavior, authentication needs, or what 'visible' entails. This is minimal and leaves the agent guessing.

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?

While the description is short, it is under-specified rather than concise. A single vague sentence without useful structure or front-loaded key details does not earn its place compared to more informative descriptions.

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?

The tool is simple (2 optional params) and has an output schema, but the description is too sparse to be complete. It lacks any context about event visibility, parameter semantics, or relationship to other list tools, making it insufficient for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 input schema has two parameters (limit, include_raw) with no descriptions, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description adds no meaning about these parameters, so an agent has no idea how to use them or what effect they have.

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 'List visible events in a compact form' clearly identifies the action (list) and resource (events), with 'visible' indicating a filter. It distinguishes from siblings like pretalx_get_event (singular) and pretalx_list_submissions (different resource), though it could be more explicit about what 'visible' means.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No prerequisites, exclusions, or sibling comparisons are mentioned. The description only states what it does, not when it is appropriate.

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