APIbase

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and mutation behavior. The description adds that this is a Ticketmaster integration (external service context) but omits behavioral details like pagination limits, rate limiting, or fuzzy vs exact matching behavior between keyword and attractionId parameters.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action ('Find events'), specifies the target resource ('by artist'), mentions key optional features ('country and date filters'), and identifies the data source ('Ticketmaster') without verbosity.

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?

Given the 9 parameters (including pagination and locale options) and the presence of comprehensive annotations, the description provides adequate but minimal context. It covers the primary search mechanism but omits guidance on pagination behavior, the distinction between fuzzy keyword search and exact ID lookup, or what the response structure contains.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline score is 3. The description mentions 'optional country and date filters' which provides minimal additional context beyond the schema, but does not explain the relationship between 'keyword' and 'attractionId' parameters or provide usage examples for the pagination parameters.

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 the tool finds events by artist/performer name using the verb 'Find' and resource 'events'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'by_venue' or 'nearby' by specifying the artist-centric search mechanism. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the general 'ticketmaster.events.search' tool.

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 usage context through 'by artist or performer name', suggesting when to use this tool (when searching for specific artists). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus the general 'events.search' sibling tool or whether to use 'keyword' versus 'attractionId' parameters.

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