get_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'get detailed information', which largely repeats the tool name and provides no insight into error behavior, required permissions, or side effects. It does not add meaningful behavioral context beyond the obvious read operation.

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. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, contains no fluff, and earns its place by clearly stating the primary function.

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 simple read tool with two clearly defined parameters, the one-line description is mostly sufficient. However, since there is no output schema, the description could optionally specify what 'detailed information' includes, but the simplicity of the tool and complete schema make the current description adequate.

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 clear descriptions for eventId and calendarId. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, but the schema already fully documents both parameters, so the baseline of 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 uses specific verb '取得' (retrieve) and resource '特定のイベント' (specific event), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_events or search_events. It unambiguously states the tool's function.

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 retrieving details of a specific event, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or mention when not to use it. No guidance on edge cases or prerequisites beyond the schema.

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