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

Annotations already mark the call read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds qualitative content that this calendar covers dividends, earnings, and macro events, and scopes it to 'the book,' which complements the safety profile. It doesn't mention any limits or dependencies, but this is acceptable given the strong 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?

Single sentence, no filler, and the content is front-loaded. It is appropriately short for a simple getter, though it reads as a fragment rather than a full instruction.

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?

With only low-complexity optional parameters plus annotations and an output schema, the description gives the core semantics. It is missing explicit parameter behavior and sibling differentiation, but the tool is callable with defaults and its output is covered by an output schema.

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 never mentions 'days' or 'household_id.' It provides no clue how the calendar horizon is set or how the household/book is selected, so the description adds no beyond what the bare parameter names suggest.

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 names a well-defined payload: upcoming dividends, earnings, and macro events scoped to the book. It lacks a clear verb like 'returns' or 'lists,' and doesn't contrast with sibling getters such as get_recent_results, but it is sufficiently specific to identify the 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?

No guidance on when to use this calendar versus alternatives like get_recent_results or get_today_brief. The description implies a use case for upcoming events but doesn't state exclusions or context.

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