get-event-spaces

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey all behavioral traits. It indicates a read operation ('Get') but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, has no side effects, or mention any authentication requirements or rate limits. The returned structure is described adequately.

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: the first states the purpose, the second details the return value. It is concise with no redundant or unnecessary information.

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 only two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and returns. It mentions hierarchy, capacity, and scheduling status. However, it could be slightly more complete by noting that the space tree is nested or by referencing the relevant sibling tool for alternative space queries.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by explaining what the tool returns (space tree) which indirectly relates to the eventId and scheduleId parameters, but does not provide additional detail about parameter format, constraints, or relationships beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'space tree for an event', and specifies the returned data (hierarchy, capacity, scheduling status). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get-event' or 'get-maintenance-spaces' by focusing on event spaces.

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 implies that the tool is used when you need event space information, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like 'get-maintenance-spaces' or provide any exclusion criteria. The usage context is implied but not detailed.

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