modx_virtualpage_get_event

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose one genuinely useful trait: the response includes the event's routes, which shapes what the agent can do with the result. It says nothing about precedence if both id and name are passed, whether a missing event errors or returns empty, or any permission requirements.

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?

A single clause with zero filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Nothing could be removed without losing 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 two-parameter read with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core (what is fetched, that routes come along) but leaves the selector contract and failure behavior undocumented. An agent can call it, but may have to guess or retry.

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 0% and both parameters are bare, so the description must compensate. "By id or name" does establish that the two are alternative selectors, which is real added meaning, but it omits the critical detail of whether one is required and which wins when both are given.

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?

"Read one VirtualPage event by id or name, including its routes" gives a specific verb (read), a specific resource (VirtualPage event), and singular scope, which implicitly separates it from modx_virtualpage_list_events. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the single-vs-list distinction.

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 never states when to reach for this tool versus modx_virtualpage_list_events or modx_virtualpage_get_route, nor any prerequisite such as needing a known id or name. Since both parameters are optional, the caller is also given no guidance on what happens if neither is supplied, which is a real decision point the description leaves open.

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