List calendar events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no indication of whether results are paginated, how many events are returned, whether recurring events are expanded, or what happens with an invalid calendar URL.

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?

It is one short sentence with no padding, so nothing is wasted. However, the brevity comes from under-specification rather than economy — the single sentence carries almost no actionable content.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description bears responsibility for conveying what comes back, and it says nothing about the returned event structure. With an undocumented required parameter and no behavioral detail, the definition is not sufficient for an agent to call the tool confidently.

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 0%, so the single required parameter calendar_url is undocumented everywhere. The description does not say whether it expects a full URL, a path, or a calendar ID, nor how to obtain one (e.g., via nextcloud_list_calendars) — a gap that directly risks malformed calls.

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 identifies the tool only by reference to another tool ('Alias for list_events'), rather than stating directly that it lists calendar events for a given calendar. Combined with the name and title the intent is inferable, but an agent reading the description alone gets a pointer instead of a verb+resource statement, and the aliasing relationship to the sibling nextcloud_list_events is implied rather than explained.

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?

'to support MCP server action' is internal jargon that gives no usage condition. It never says when to call this versus nextcloud_list_events or nextcloud_list_calendars, nor that calendar_url must identify an existing calendar.

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