list_event_items

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

No annotations are provided, and the description lacks disclosure of behavioral traits such as read-only nature, error handling, or limits. It merely states the action without elaborating on side effects or expectations.

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 sentence, concise and to the point. It lacks structural elements like bullet points or parameter details but is efficient for a simple tool with one parameter.

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 tool has one required parameter and an output schema exists, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not mention what the output contains or handle edge cases like invalid event names, which could be improved.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for the parameter, but the description adds meaning by specifying that event_name refers to a TF2 event/update with concrete examples. However, it does not specify format, case sensitivity, or valid values, leaving gaps.

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 lists items added during a given TF2 event/update, with specific examples like 'Jungle Inferno Update'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_cosmetic or search_wiki, which serve different purposes.

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 by providing examples but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. Sibling tools are not contrasted.

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