Routine

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it offers no information about what the tool does beyond the tautological statement. There's no mention of whether it's a read or write operation, authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens when invoked. This leaves the agent with no behavioral context.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence, 'The events on a given day.' While this under-specifies the tool's functionality, it is front-loaded and wastes no words, earning full marks for conciseness. However, this brevity contributes to low scores in other dimensions.

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 tool's complexity (3 required parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It fails to explain the tool's purpose, usage, behavior, or parameters, leaving the agent with insufficient information to select and invoke the tool correctly. The lack of output schema further exacerbates this gap.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, meaning parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond what the schema provides—it doesn't explain what 'date', 'filter', or 'secondary' mean or how they affect the tool's behavior. With 3 required parameters and no compensation in the description, this is inadequate.

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 'The events on a given day' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'eventDay' without specifying the action. It doesn't clearly state what the tool does (e.g., 'retrieve', 'list', or 'display' events) or distinguish it from sibling tools like 'eventGet' or 'eventTimeline'. The purpose is vague rather than specific.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of context, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools such as 'eventGet' or 'eventTimeline'. Without any usage instructions, the agent lacks direction on appropriate application.

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