get_tickets_for_event

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable context: the tool is host-only and works for ticketed events, which implies access restrictions and preconditions not present in annotations.

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 with no redundant wording. It front-loads the main purpose and then efficiently differentiates from sibling tools. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a read-only getter with an output schema, the description covers purpose, access restriction, and distinctions from related tools. It does not mention error cases or behaviors for non-ticketed events, but these are secondary. Overall it is complete enough.

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 100%, so both event_id and fields are described. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond the schema, but the schema itself is adequate. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gets all tickets sold for a ticketed Partiful event, with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes itself from get_tickets_for_ticket_type and get_guest_payment_info, making the scope unambiguous.

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 names two alternatives and explains how they differ: get_tickets_for_ticket_type is scoped to one ticket type, and get_guest_payment_info covers one guest's payment history. This gives clear guidance on when to choose this tool over those.

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