get_manage_event

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation ('Get') and mentions token-based authentication, but does not disclose other traits like idempotency, rate limits, or error handling. The coverage is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose ('Get full event details including the registrations list') and then providing essential auth guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant or extraneous content.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and authentication. However, it does not clarify the tool's niche relative to sibling 'get_event', which might be confusing if both are available. Slightly more context on when this tool is appropriate would improve completeness.

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%, and the tool description does not add any new meaning beyond what is already in the input schema. The schema already explains the manage_token parameter's source and fallback. Thus the description adds no extra semantic value.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'full event details including the registrations list'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'get_event' (which likely returns public details without registrations) by specifying the inclusion of registrations and the requirement of a manage token.

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 explicitly states the auth requirement ('Requires the manage token or REALEVENTS_MANAGE_TOKEN env var'), guiding when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools like 'get_event', leaving the agent to infer when to choose this one over others.

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