get_display_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the HTTP method and endpoint (GET /events/{event_id}/display_settings/) and the required authentication (Authorization: Bearer PERSONAL_OAUTH_TOKEN), which is genuinely useful behavioral context. However, it says nothing about error behavior, rate limiting, or what a missing event_id yields. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Front-loads the purpose in one sentence, then uses short labeled sections (ENDPOINT, AUTHENTICATION). No filler. Slightly unconventional for a tool description, but every line carries 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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is roughly complete: it identifies the resource, endpoint, and auth. It omits any hint of what the response contains (e.g., name, color, layout fields) and any usage context relative to siblings.

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% and there is a single required parameter already documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the endpoint path template which reinforces the param meaning, but does not add semantics 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?

States a specific verb (Retrieve) and resource (Display Settings for an Event), and clearly scopes them to how the Event appears on the Event Listing page. This distinguishes it from sibling update_display_settings and from other get_* entity tools.

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 a read operation for display settings but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus update_display_settings or other event-related getters. Usage is inferable from the naming and the resource definition, but no explicit when/when-not guidance is given.

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