get_map_events

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that only confirmed events are returned, which is useful. However, it omits details like data format, pagination, or latency, leaving gaps for a developer.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool, but could be slightly expanded to include critical details without losing brevity.

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 lacks essential context for a map-display tool, such as coordinate format (e.g., lat/lng bounds), output type (e.g., GeoJSON), and any limits. Given no output schema and no annotations, more information is needed for correct usage.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's 'Bounding box' for the 'bounds' parameter, so it does not improve parameter understanding.

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 it retrieves 'confirmed events only' for 'map display', specifying a filter and intended use. While brief, it differentiates from siblings like list_events or get_event by focusing on map display and confirmation status.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_map_messages or get_event_timeline. The implication is for map display, but no exclusions or context about the 'confirmed' filter is provided.

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