connects_events

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: it explains logical pagination, tells the agent to use next_offset, and clarifies that scan_exhausted signals an incomplete bounded search rather than an absence of results. This is especially useful given the openWorldHint annotation and helps the agent interpret pagination responses correctly.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core purpose in the first sentence and critical pagination semantics in the second. No filler is present, though the second sentence is dense with jargon that could be slightly clearer.

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?

Annotations and the output schema cover safety and return shape, and the description supplies important pagination semantics. However, with six input parameters and no schema descriptions, the tool definition leaves parameter meaning mostly to inference, and it does not help the agent choose this tool over event-related siblings.

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 0%, so the description needed to compensate for undocumented parameters, but it does not explain query, scope, category, group_id, limit, or offset. The phrase 'including your registered upcoming or past events' only indirectly hints at scope values like my-upcoming and my-past, and the mention of next_offset concerns an output field rather than an input parameter.

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 clear action ('Search/list') and resource ('events'), and adds scope context ('including your registered upcoming or past events'). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like connects_event or connects_schedule, but the plural 'events' and search/list framing make its broad listing purpose reasonably clear.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus siblings such as connects_event, connects_schedule, or other event-related tools. The description implies a search/list use case but does not state exclusions or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer the correct selection.

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