search_events

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

The description only states the basic functionality without disclosing any behavioral traits such as filtering semantics, results ordering, pagination, or authorization requirements. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but fails to provide meaningful behavioral context beyond the purpose.

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 fluff. However, it is under-specified and lacks any structure or elaboration that would make it more useful, such as mentioning parameter combinations or return behavior.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain how timeMin/timeMax, calendarId, or maxResults affect the search, nor what the response contains. The schema partially fills the gap, but the description itself provides minimal context.

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%, so all parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description text adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but the baseline for high coverage is 3.

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 tool searches events by keyword, which is a specific verb+resource+method. It distinguishes from sibling list_events which likely lists events without keyword filtering, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for keyword-based searching, but does not mention when to prefer it over list_events or get_event, or exclude when not to use it.

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