get_calendar_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states that the tool retrieves a specific calendar event, implying a read-only operation with no side effects. However, it does not disclose response format, error behavior (e.g., 404 if not found), or any authentication requirements. 'Full details' is vague about what exactly is returned.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the key information: what it does (get), what resource (calendar event), and how (by ID). Every word earns its place with no redundancy or 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?

For a simple single-parameter retrieval tool with 100% schema coverage and no complex nested objects, the description is nearly complete. It does not explain return values in detail, but 'full details' gives a reasonable hint. Given the low complexity and no output schema, this is adequate, though a bit more about the response structure would make it fully complete.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters, with eventId described as 'The calendar event ID to retrieve'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'by its ID', so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. No parameter info is missing that would require compensation.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('calendar event'), and the scope ('specific by its ID'). It distinguishes from sibling 'get_calendar_events' which presumably lists multiple events, and from create/update/delete variants.

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 usage is implied: you need full details of a single event given its ID. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this instead of get_calendar_events or provide any exclusion criteria. No alternatives are named, so guidance is minimal but not misleading.

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