list_events

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

Annotations already declare the safe read profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), yet the description adds traits those annotations cannot carry: the 93-day/250-occurrence limits, the fact that only minimal summaries are returned, and a security warning that calendar text is untrusted data. That is substantive disclosure beyond structured fields.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then parameter guidance, then return/security notes — every sentence carries information. It is telegraphic and slightly jargon-dense, but there is no 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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return burden and does: minimal summaries plus event_id, with detail deferred to get_event. Combined with the caps and untrusted-data warning, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly and safely.

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 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: where calendar_id comes from (list_calendars), that offsets must be explicit with UTC Z allowed, and the guidance to use the requested date's offset for local boundaries. It restates a few schema facts (end later than start, 93-day cap), which caps it below 5.

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 and resource ('Read minimal event summaries') and immediately scopes it against siblings: get_event is required for descriptions/locations. An agent can distinguish this list tool from get_event without opening the schema.

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?

Names the alternatives explicitly ('calendar_id from list_calendars', 'returns event_id for get_event') and gives the conditions that select them, plus concrete usage constraints (end later than start, 93-day and 250-occurrence caps, offset convention for local boundaries). Little is left to inference.

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