calendar_overview

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that failed files and skipped events are reported with reasons, which is useful transparency beyond a simple listing. It does not discuss permissions or rate limits, but for a zero-parameter read-only overview tool the disclosed behavior is strong.

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 and front-loads the core purpose before giving the critical 'call this first' instruction. It is dense but every clause adds useful information about return content or usage, with no wasted wording.

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 no parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description provides everything needed to call it correctly. It explains scope, return contents, error reporting behavior, and ordering relative to other tools, so the agent is not missing required context.

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 tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not a major concern and the baseline is 4. The mention of `calendars` and `calendar` parameters in other tools adds useful context about how the output is consumed, even though this tool itself has an empty schema.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it lists calendar files visible to the server. It also names the exact fields returned for each file, including event counts, recurring series, date span, and time zones, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like agenda and search_events.

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?

It explicitly says 'Call this first,' giving a clear ordering instruction. It also explains why: the file names it prints are accepted by the `calendars` and `calendar` parameters of other tools, which directly ties usage to downstream actions.

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