swapcard_list_event_people

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses read-only intent ('List or search') and important behavior like cursor-based pagination and optional email filtering. It does not mention return format, pagination limits, or required auth, but for a list operation this is minimally adequate.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose and packs in the main optional capabilities without wasted words. It is appropriately concise.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about what is returned, how pagination behaves, and how the parameters interact. The single sentence covers the high-level purpose but leaves significant gaps for a 5-parameter tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does mention search, email filtering, and cursor-based pagination, which map to the search, emails, after, and first parameters. However, it does not explain specific formats, defaults, or how the cursor works, leaving some ambiguity.

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 action ('List or search') and the resource ('attendees/people in an event'), and mentions key capabilities like email filtering and cursor-based pagination. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like swapcard_delete_event_people and swapcard_import_event_people.

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 the tool is for retrieving or searching event attendees, which is enough for a basic list tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it over sibling list tools (e.g., list_meetings, list_sessions) or provide exclusion criteria.

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