List Events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds a quota-cost warning for pagination, which is genuine value beyond annotations, but omits return format, rate limits, and any auth/scope behavior.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the quota caveat. Efficient, though the opening sentence duplicates the title rather than earning its place.

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 nine-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is thin but the schema and annotations carry most of the load. It omits any mention of the pagination/sort semantics or what a caller receives, leaving modest gaps.

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 all nine parameters are already documented in the schema, including the all_pages quota note and max_items continuation state. The description adds nothing about parameter syntax or interaction, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 first sentence 'List Events' merely restates the tool name/title, and 'Reads community data' is generic filler. The verb+resource is nonetheless identifiable, but nothing distinguishes it from siblings like get_event, list_event_attendees, or search, which also touch 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 notes that all_pages is supported and quota-consuming, but gives no when-to-use guidance, no conditions for choosing this over get_event or list_event_attendees, and no exclusions. Usage is only implied by the name.

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