get-event

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Get detailed information' clearly indicates a read-only retrieval operation with no side effects, though it does not specify behavior for missing IDs or error cases. For a simple read-by-ID tool, the core behavior is sufficiently transparent.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the meaning, and the description is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter retrieval tool.

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 get-by-ID tool with one fully documented required parameter, the description is nearly complete. The only minor gap is that no output schema exists and the description does not clarify what fields 'detailed information' includes, but an agent can still invoke the tool correctly with the given information.

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%, so the input schema already fully documents eventId as 'The ID of the event to retrieve'. The description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond restating that the event is retrieved by ID, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('Get'), a resource ('event'), and the selection by ID. It distinguishes from the sibling list-events by focusing on one specific event rather than a collection.

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 use when the agent already knows the event ID and needs details for that single event, while list-events would be used to enumerate events. It provides clear context but does not explicitly name the alternative or state when not to use it.

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