find_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It explains how 'near' is resolved differently across worlds, that date filtering is primarily for earth-313, and that results are returned as a formatted narrative. These details go beyond the schema and reveal meaningful behavioral traits.

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 compact and well-structured: a clear one-line purpose, an organized bullet list of parameters, and a brief return statement. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description covers all eight optional parameters, highlights world-specific behavior, and notes the output format. Even though an output schema exists, the description provides additional context (e.g., narrative list) and leaves no critical gaps for a tool of this complexity.

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%, and the description compensates fully by explaining every parameter including defaults, formats, and alternatives (e.g., near vs lat/lon, date format, topic examples). This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema definitions.

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 'Find events' with a specific resource (events) and provides a distinct domain separate from sibling tools such as accommodations or gastronomy. It also mentions 'in the current world', which identifies the scope while not requiring inference.

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 gives clear context on when to use the tool (searching for events) and describes world-specific behavior (near geocoding for earth-313 vs. landmark-resolved for bral). It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the clear domain and examples imply appropriate usage.

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