list_events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety profile. The description adds context about required range and pagination, but does not disclose additional behaviors like timezone handling, default limit, or response format beyond what annotations provide.

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, well-formed phrase with no unnecessary words. It conveys the essential function and distinguishing features efficiently.

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 six parameters, useful annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose but lacks details on return values, error conditions, timezone format, and ordering. It is adequate for a straightforward listing but incomplete for handling edge cases or understanding response structure.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by indicating that 'explicit range' refers to start/end parameters and 'pagination' to limit/cursor. However, it does not explain calendar_id, timezone, or detailed format of the string parameters, leaving agents to infer from parameter names alone.

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 'List events in an explicit range with pagination' clearly specifies the verb (list), resource (events), and key features (range, pagination). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_calendars, get_event, and create_event, which have different purposes.

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 when listing events within a specific time range with pagination, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_event (single event) or find_conflicts. No direct when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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