preview_calendar_publication

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so 'this performs no Calendar write' largely restates structured data. The description does add that exactly one all-day event is previewed, but says nothing about what happens if the version is unapproved or nonexistent.

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?

Two tight sentences with the action and scope front-loaded and the safety note last. Nothing is wasted.

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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the description covers purpose, scope, and the no-write guarantee. The main gap is not clarifying the approval precondition or failure behavior.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It clarifies that draftId identifies an approved draft and version must be an exact version, which is useful context, but it does not explain format, ordering, or what happens on version mismatch.

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?

States a specific verb (Preview) and resource (one all-day Apple Calendar event) scoped to an exact approved draft version. It implicitly separates itself from publish_to_calendar and preview_notion_publication, but never names those siblings explicitly.

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 'exact approved draft version' implies a precondition (the draft must be approved) and signals this is a dry-run, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or statement directing the agent to publish_to_calendar afterward.

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