calendar_v3_list_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'List upcoming calendar events with Google Meet conferences', which implies a read-only operation, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens if no events are found. The description is minimal and lacks critical operational context.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It avoids unnecessary words, but could be slightly more structured by explicitly mentioning it's for listing events (not creating or updating). Overall, it is appropriately concise with no wasted text.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with 4 parameters. It lacks details on behavioral aspects (e.g., pagination, error handling), does not explain the 'Google Meet conferences' filter, and provides no guidance on usage versus siblings. For a read operation in a complex API context, this leaves significant gaps.

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 the schema fully documents all parameters (max_results, time_min, time_max, calendar_id) with descriptions and defaults. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining the 'Google Meet conferences' filter or parameter interactions. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('upcoming calendar events'), and specifies 'with Google Meet conferences' to indicate a key feature. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'calendar_v3_get_event' (single event) or 'calendar_v3_list_calendars' (list calendars), leaving some ambiguity in scope.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions 'upcoming calendar events with Google Meet conferences', which implies a focus on events with conferences, but it does not state when to choose this over 'calendar_v3_list_calendars' or other event-related tools, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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