bni_upcoming_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by stating events are public and upfront, but it does not describe the return format, ordering, date window semantics, or behavior when no events match. This is adequate but leaves room for more transparency.

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?

One dense, front-loaded sentence captures the tool's purpose and scope, followed by a useful cross-reference. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or redundant restating of the tool name.

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?

The description, combined with the fully documented schema, gives an agent enough to call the tool correctly for an initial list request. The main gap is that, with no output schema, it does not mention what event fields are returned or point to bni_event_detail for follow-up details.

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 value beyond the schema by suggesting bni_list_event_types as a source for search terms, which directly helps an agent populate the optional 'search' parameter meaningfully.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Lists upcoming public BNI events for a country'. It also names the event categories (trainings, webinars, regional visitor days), which clarifies scope and distinguishes it from detail/listing siblings like bni_event_detail and bni_list_event_types.

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?

It clearly states the use case: listing future public events by country. The pointer to bni_list_event_types for good search terms gives practical guidance on how to refine the search, though it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or contrast it with bni_event_detail.

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