get_eventRetrieve a specific Google Calendar event by ID from a selected calendar, defaulting to the primary calendar for quick lookups.
Get a single event by ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| event_id | Yes | The event ID | |
| calendar_id | No | Calendar ID (default: 'primary') | primary |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read operation through 'Get' but does not state read-only safety, error behavior, auth requirements, or whether calendar scoping affects the lookup.
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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool.
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 a simple two-parameter schema, complete parameter descriptions, and an output schema, the core retrieval contract is covered. However, the lack of annotations and any usage or behavioral context leaves the definition minimally complete rather than fully informative.
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 already documents event_id and calendar_id, including the default for calendar_id. The description only says 'by ID' and adds no further meaning beyond the schema.
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 states a specific verb and resource: retrieving a single event by ID. It clearly distinguishes the operation from list_events, create_event, and search_events, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.
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 phrase 'by ID' implies the tool should be used when an event ID is known, which gives minimal usage context. However, it does not say when to prefer list_events, search_events, or get_calendar instead.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.