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

Annotations already establish that this is a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds almost no behavioral context beyond that — it does not mention batch size limits, account requirements, what happens when hiding, or any side effects. It does not contradict the 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though its extreme brevity leaves important details unsaid.

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 a batch mutation with a nested object array, no output schema, and zero property descriptions in the schema, the description is not complete enough. It omits key operational details such as how accountId and providerCalendarId identify a calendar, the batch constraints, and what the visibility change affects.

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%, and the description only loosely maps the hidden boolean to 'show or hide calendars'. It never explains the entries array, accountId, providerCalendarId, the 500-item maximum, or the 1-item minimum, leaving the nested parameter structure largely undocumented.

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 specific action pair (show/hide) and resource (calendars), making the tool's purpose clear at a glance. It does not explicitly contrast with any sibling tool, but the visibility-setting purpose is distinct enough from list_calendars and update_sync to avoid confusion.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state prerequisites such as needing an existing account or provider calendar. Usage is only implied by the basic purpose statement.

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