seatgeek_search_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose read-only nature, rate limits, or error handling. The minimal description fails to inform agents of expected behavior beyond the basic search action.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) but at the cost of completeness. Front-loading is present, but the brevity reduces its utility. It earns a middling score for failing to provide sufficient detail despite being short.

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 5 undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how to construct a query, interpret results, or handle errors, leaving agents with insufficient context.

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 schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description adds no information about any parameter. Agents are left to guess the meaning and usage of 'q', 'type', 'datetime_utc_gte', 'per_page', and 'api_key'.

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 states 'Search for events on SeatGeek,' which is a clear verb+resource pair. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like seatgeek_search_performers or seatgeek_search_venues, nor from non-search tools like seatgeek_get_event.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., for specific entities or when to use 'get' vs 'search'). The description lacks context for appropriate usage.

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