get_shared_calendar_event

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

Annotations cover readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond them: the operation works without a subscription, the `subscribed` field state is exposed, the non-shareable path 404s, and user-created events are forced private. This is genuine added value, though no rate-limit or auth detail is given.

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?

Front-loaded with the operation and resource, and each clause (catalogue, fields, no-subscription, 404, private-creation) earns its place. Slightly dense with backticked paths, but no filler.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by naming return fields (locationStartPoint, subscribersCount, provider, subscribed) and the safety profile is covered by annotations. Coverage is strong for a single-param lookup, missing only the uuid's origin/format.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter load. It exposes the URL template with `{uuid}` and implies the uuid is a shareable-event-specific identifier, but does not define the parameter's format or where to obtain it. Baseline-adequate but incomplete.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (GET an event from Garmin's public events catalogue) and explicitly differentiates from the sibling get_calendar_event by noting the plain `/event/{uuid}` is a 404. An agent can identify this tool's distinct role without opening the schema.

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?

Clearly states it works WITHOUT subscribing (`subscribed: false`) and that user-created events never get a shareable uuid, which tells the agent when this tool is applicable. It does not name an explicit alternative sibling such as get_calendar_event, though the 404 note implicitly routes the agent here for public events.

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