Get Calendar Event

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces read-only behavior and, because there is no output schema, usefully lists the fields returned. It does not explain error behavior for invalid IDs, but the key behavioral traits are covered.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and return fields. No wasted words; the guidance about event_id appears exactly where needed.

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 read-only single-record fetch with no output schema, the description is complete enough: it identifies the tool's purpose, lists the output fields, and points to the correct source for the required ID. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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%, and the single parameter event_id is fully documented there, including sources (list_calendar_events or list_my_reservations). The description repeats one source but adds no format details beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource ('Get one calendar event') and enumerates the returned fields (title, start/end time, location, description, course). It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling list_calendar_events by being a single-event fetch.

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?

Explicitly says to obtain event_id from list_calendar_events, which gives clear usage context. It does not state when not to use it or name alternatives beyond the sibling, but for a straightforward retrieval tool this is sufficient.

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