list_events

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it mention pagination via count, default sorting, time-range filtering, or that user_uri can override the authenticated user scope. Significant behavioral information is missing.

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 concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though it could have included more context without becoming verbose. Efficiency is good, but substance is thin.

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?

The tool has six optional parameters and no output schema, so the description must provide orientation about capabilities and constraints. It fails to mention filtering options, pagination, time bounds, or the ability to target other users via user_uri, making it insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's full scope and invoke it correctly.

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?

All six parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description need not repeat their syntax. However, it adds no extra semantics about how parameters interact, default behavior, or which combinations are valid, leaving the schema as the sole source of information.

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 clearly identifies the action (List) and resource (scheduled events) with a scope (for the authenticated user). It distinguishes from get_event by implying a collection operation, though it does not explicitly mention filtering by user_uri which could list events for other users.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_event (single event), list_event_types, or list_event_invitees. No alternatives, exclusions, or contextual cues are given.

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