list_events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety profile is covered. Description adds return field list and filtering options, but does not disclose pagination defaults, ordering, or timezone behavior; annotations lower the burden.

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?

Three sentences, first is action+scope, second gives usage context, third lists return fields. No filler or duplication of schema parameter details.

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 read-only list tool with good annotations and full schema coverage, description covers purpose, usage, and return shape. It could mention default date range behavior or ordering, but these are schema-documented; overall sufficiently complete.

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?

Input schema covers all 5 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description merely restates filtering dimensions without adding syntax, format, or interaction details beyond schema, so baseline 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?

Description names specific action 'List local calendar events' and clarifies filtering dimensions (title, date range, calendar name), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_calendars (which lists calendars, not events) and add_to_calendar (which creates 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?

States explicit use cases: check existing events before creating, verify a recently added event. This implies when to use relative to add_to_calendar, though it does not name alternative tools or state when not to use.

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