eventbrite_search_events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description adds nothing on top of that: it does not mention the API-key/auth requirement, result limits, pagination, or rate limiting — the kind of context that would actually earn credit here.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero redundancy, so nothing needs cutting. But the terseness is under-specification rather than efficiency; there is only one clause of substantive content for a four-parameter tool.

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, 0% parameter coverage, and no annotations about return shape, the description carries the full burden and does not meet it. An agent knows it searches Eventbrite, but not what a result contains, whether a credential is required, or how dates and locations must be formatted.

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 all four parameters (q, api_key, location_address, start_date_range_start) are undocumented in both schema and description. The word 'search' weakly implies a query string, but nothing explains the date-range parameter's format (ISO? YYYY-MM-DD?), what location_address accepts, or that api_key is a credential — a substantial gap the description fails to compensate for.

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?

States a specific verb+resource combination ('Search for events') scoped to Eventbrite, which cleanly separates it from the same-named siblings (eventbrite_get_event, eventbrite_create_event, eventbrite_get_venue) that use a different verb. However, it does nothing to distinguish it from other event-search tools in the catalog such as seatgeek_search_events, tm_search_events, or yelp_search_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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer this over the SeatGeek or Ticketmaster search siblings, and no stated prerequisites despite an api_key parameter implying authentication is required. The agent must infer everything about applicability from the tool name alone.

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