get_team_events

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

Annotations already indicate safe, read-only behavior. The description adds valuable detail about return fields (name, dates, location, etc.) without contradicting annotations.

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?

Four sentences efficiently convey purpose, return content, usage, and alternatives. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 simple list tool with two well-documented parameters and comprehensive annotations, the description fully covers return fields, usage context, and alternatives. No 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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions and constraints. Description does not add further parameter information beyond schema; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool lists every FRC event for a team in a given year, returning full event records. Explicitly distinguishes from lighter alternatives (get_team_events_simple, get_team_events_keys), leaving no ambiguity about its scope.

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?

Provides explicit use cases ('build a team's seasonal schedule' or 'determine which events to scout') and mentions lighter variants, guiding when to use this tool vs. alternatives.

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