calendars_get_calendar_events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. However, the description adds no behavioral insight—it doesn't explain what events are returned, how filtering works, or any default behavior. It provides zero added value beyond the annotations.

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?

While the description is concise (a single phrase), it is under-specified to the point of being unhelpful. It fails to convey the tool's purpose or context, making it an inadequate substitute for a proper description. It is not 'appropriately sized' because it omits essential information that an agent needs to understand the tool.

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?

With 6 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, this description is woefully incomplete. An agent cannot infer the tool's function, semantics of the time range, or how the user/group/calendar filters apply from the description alone. It relies entirely on schema descriptions, which may not convey the overall behavior and expected output.

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%, with each parameter having a descriptive label (e.g., startTime, endTime, userId). The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters. Since the schema fully documents them, the baseline of 3 is appropriate, but the description neither enhances nor clarifies parameter usage.

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 'Get Calendar Events' is a direct restatement of the tool name, providing no additional specificity. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like 'calendars_get_calendars' or 'calendars_get_appointment', nor does it mention that it operates on events within a time range. It is a tautology that adds no value beyond the name.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of required parameters, typical use cases, or exclusions. The description gives no context that would help an agent decide between this and other calendar-related tools.

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