gitex_info

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

No annotations provided, but the description is straightforward about returning event details. The tool is purely informational with no side effects, and the description covers the core behavior. With zero annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does so adequately, though it could mention that it is read-only or that output schema defines return structure.

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 two sentences long, no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and provides key details concisely.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description need not explain return values. It provides specific event details (dates, venue) which are highly informative. Could be more complete by hinting at additional details like ticket info or website, but for a simple info tool, it is sufficient.

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?

There are no parameters (0 params), so baseline is 4 according to guidelines. The description does not need to add parameter information since none exist, and schema coverage is 100%.

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 returns 'GITEX Global 2026 details and venue,' and provides specific confirmed dates and venue location. It is a specific verb ('Return') with a clear resource and scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'uae_holidays' or 'startup_events'.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the unique event name implies its purpose, there is no guidance on when not to use it or mention of similar tools. A score of 3 reflects minimal guidance but adequate implied context.

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