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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered and the bar is lower. The description does add useful behavioral context — the next-30-days default window when dates are omitted — but says nothing about ordering, result volume, or whether events outside the school year are excluded.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its contents, then the default range. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 read-only, four-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description plus the fully documented schema give an agent enough to call it correctly. The only minor gap is that it does not hint at the returned event fields or ordering, which is tolerable given the absence of 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 100%, so 'from' and 'to' semantics, formats and omission behavior are already documented in the schema. The description's 'between two dates' and 'defaults to the next 30 days' restate the schema's own omission rules rather than adding new meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 concrete resource (school academic calendar) and enumerates its contents (exams, vacations, holidays, field trips, ceremonies), which plausibly separates it from get_timetable. However, it never states an explicit retrieval verb, relying on the noun phrase to imply 'list events', so it stops just short of maximum clarity.

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?

Usage is implied by the event-type list and the default window, so an agent can infer this is the calendar tool rather than the timetable tool. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no alternative named (get_timetable is the obvious confusion candidate), and no mention that eduCode/schoolCode must first come from search_schools.

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