get-specific-calendar-view

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it explains expanded recurring instances, includes seriesMasterId and type fields, warns about large payloads with fetchAllPages, and mentions Teams meeting joinWebUrl property. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent anticipate behavior.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clearly separated tip section. While it is relatively long, each sentence provides actionable information (e.g., required params, expansion behavior, filtering options). The structure is clear and avoids redundancy, though it could be tightened slightly.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description explains what the response includes (expanded instances with seriesMasterId and type). It covers required parameters, pagination advice, and specific filtering for Teams meetings. Given the tool's complexity (16 params) and the openWorldHint, the description is reasonably complete, though it doesn't mention error handling or timezone defaults (which are in the 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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema alone documents all 16 parameters. The description adds practical advice on top of the schema, such as using fetchAllPages for many events, filtering for Teams meetings, and interpreting seriesMasterId/type fields. This enhances parameter understanding beyond the 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 clearly states the specific action ('List the occurrences, exceptions, and single instances of events') and the resource ('from one of the signed-in user's calendars addressed by calendar ID'). It differentiates from siblings by highlighting that it returns expanded recurring event instances (not just seriesMaster), which sets it apart from other calendar listing tools like list-specific-calendar-events or get-calendar-view.

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 concrete usage guidance: requires startDateTime and endDateTime, suggests fetchAllPages for many events, and gives a $filter example for Teams meetings. However, it does not explicitly contrast against sibling tools (e.g., 'use this instead of get-calendar-view when you need expanded instances'), leaving some room for inference. The tip partially fills this gap.

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