get_events

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden for disclosure. It adds useful context: events are AI-generated, require Pro+ plan, and can be filtered by exchange symbol. This goes beyond a bare 'get events' but could still mention pagination or defaults; however, the essential behaviors are clear.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each sentence earns its place: what it does, when to use, and how to filter. No redundancy or fluff.

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 simplicity (2 optional params, output schema present) and the sibling set, the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, use case, and optional filtering. It could add an explicit alternative or exclusion, but the provided information is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context for the symbol parameter by specifying 'exact exchange symbol' and explains that omitting it gives market-wide events. The limit parameter is left to the schema, but the description adequately supports the most common usage.

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 retrieves 'AI-generated stock event summaries' with specific attributes (type, importance, sentiment). It distinguishes itself from sibling quote and market data tools by focusing on corporate/news events.

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 explicitly says to use it 'for recent corporate/news-style events' and notes the Pro+ plan requirement. It does not explicitly list excluded use cases or alternatives, but the context and sibling tool names make it evident when this tool is appropriate.

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