get_calendar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It simply states 'retrieve detailed information' without specifying read-only semantics, permission requirements, error behavior, or return format. The action 'get' is implied but not explicitly framed.

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 in Japanese that communicates purpose without redundancy. It is appropriately front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word earns its place.

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?

This is a simple get-by-ID tool with one parameter and no output schema. The description is minimally sufficient to understand the basic function but does not clarify what '詳細情報' includes or how errors are handled. Given low complexity, it meets the minimum viable threshold but lacks richer detail.

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 schema covers the single parameter 'calendarId' with a clear description and examples (e.g., 'primary' or email). The tool description adds no parameter-specific information, so it does not improve on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 the verb '取得' (retrieve) with the resource '指定したカレンダー' (specified calendar), and specifies '詳細情報' (detailed information), clearly indicating a single calendar lookup rather than listing. This distinguishes it from sibling 'list_calendars'.

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 implies usage for a specific calendar (指定した) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_calendars or get_event. No exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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