search_events

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool searches and returns all matching events, but does not discuss potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or output format. Since it's a search operation, the read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated.

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 concise at two sentences, front-loads the core action, and avoids redundant detail. Every word contributes to conveying purpose and behavior.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is largely complete: it explains what is searched, which fields are matched, and what is returned. It stops short of discussing result ordering or pagination, but these are minor gaps for a simple search tool.

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 coverage for the query parameter is 100%, giving a baseline of 3. However, the description adds meaningful semantics by specifying that the query matches against title, description, and body content, which goes beyond the schema's generic 'match against event content' phrasing.

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: searching Contentful events, specifying the exact content types (event pages and event cards) and fields matched (title, description, body content). This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling search tools targeting other content types.

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 establishes clear context for when to use this tool (when searching for events), implicitly differentiating it from sibling tools for other content types. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the resource-specific language makes the intended usage apparent.

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