add_event

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

The description only says 'Add', implying mutation, but provides no details about side effects, required permissions, or what happens if required fields are missing. No annotations are present to supplement, so the description fails to disclose important behavioral traits beyond the basic 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 a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. While it earns its place by being brief, it does not provide enough information for a tool with 5 parameters and nested objects. A bit more detail would improve usability.

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 complexity (5 params, enums, nested position object, and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not mention event types, definitions, or the optional nature of position and attachTo. An AI agent would need to rely entirely on the schema, which may not be sufficient for correct invocation in all scenarios.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add any information about parameters beyond what the schema already provides. It is adequate but not enhanced.

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 action 'Add an event' and the context 'to the current diagram'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_activity or add_gateway by specifying 'event', though it could be more explicit about BPMN event types. Overall, it's clear and specific.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_activity or add_gateway. No prerequisites are mentioned (e.g., an open diagram is implied but not stated). The description offers no instructions on when not to use or what conditions must be met.

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