list_events

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

The description adds two useful behavioral cues: the data comes from the official GWOSC catalog and pagination should follow has_more. With annotations already present, the bar is lower, but it still omits page size, ordering, authentication needs, and where has_more appears in the response. The readOnlyHint=false annotation also creates mild tension with a pure listing operation, though it is not an explicit contradiction.

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 a single compact sentence with no wasted wording. The semicolon construction is slightly cryptic, but the core instruction is front-loaded and easy to scan.

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 paginated listing tool with no output schema, the description is too thin. It references has_more without documenting where it is returned, and it leaves the sole page parameter semantically unexplained, so an agent lacks enough information to paginate confidently.

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?

There is one parameter with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must carry the burden of explaining page semantics. It says only 'one page' and does not clarify whether page is one-indexed, what the default page does, or how large a page is.

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 states a specific verb and resource shape: list one page of the official GWOSC catalog. However, it does not explicitly say these are events or distinguish this operation from the sibling get_catalog, so the agent must infer the relationship from the tool name alone.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use list_events versus get_catalog, get_results, or get_guide. The only procedural hint is 'follow has_more explicitly,' which addresses pagination continuation but not tool selection.

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