fetchEventMatches

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is already known. The description adds behavioral details: two modes, compact vs verbose responses via the verbose parameter, and the ability to filter. No contradictions.

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 very concise: two sentences with bullet points for modes. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and efficiently conveys the core functionality.

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 tool has 11 parameters and no output schema. The description covers the two modes and filtering but omits details about return format, pagination (implied by 'limit'), or error behavior. For a complex tool, this leaves some gaps.

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 55%—some parameters are not described in the schema. The description explains the eventId/slug mode distinction and the verbose parameter's effect, but does not elaborate on other parameters like relation, minConfidence, limit, or includePrices. It adds moderate value 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 tool's purpose: 'Find the same or related event on other venues' and distinguishes two modes (Lookup and Browse), which differentiates it from siblings like fetchEvents or fetchMarketMatches that operate on single venues or markets.

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?

It provides clear guidance on when to use each mode (with eventId/slug for lookup, without for browse) and mentions query/category filtering. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, though the context of sibling tools makes it inferable.

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