eventbrite_get_event

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states it returns 'details' but does not specify what those details include (e.g., venue, date, status), nor any side effects, prerequisites, or authorization requirements.

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, clear sentence that is appropriately sized for a simple tool. It is front-loaded with action and resource, but lacks any structure (e.g., bullet points) that could enhance readability for complex cases.

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 lacks an output schema and has no description of return values. The description should inform the user what 'details' means, e.g., typical fields or structure, to be complete for an agent relying on the description alone.

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 2 parameters (event_id required, api_key optional) with 0% description coverage. The description only explains event_id by mentioning 'by ID', but does not explain api_key or its necessity, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 'Get details for an Eventbrite event by ID' clearly specifies the verb (get), resource (Eventbrite event), and method (by ID), distinguishing it from siblings like eventbrite_search_events or eventbrite_get_attendees.

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 clearly indicates when to use the tool: when you have an event ID and need its details. It implies the context of ID-based retrieval but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use, which slightly lowers the score.

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