get_calendar_feed

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses read-only behavior, idempotency ('Calling again returns the SAME link'), the return payload ('subscribe_links holds one-click add links per app'), and the 8-24 hour Google refresh cadence. It omits auth/permission requirements, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences, no waste, with the core purpose and the human-facing framing front-loaded ahead of the operational caveats.

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 annotations or output schema, but the description supplies the return shape (subscribe_links, stable link), the side-effect profile (read-only, no subscription breakage), and the freshness tradeoff. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 single 'address' parameter has 0% schema description coverage, and the description never explains it explicitly; 'this inbox's calendar' only vaguely implies it is an inbox address. Format expectations (email string vs id) are left unstated, so the description fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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+resource and scope ('Read-only subscribe link for this inbox's calendar') and immediately distinguishes itself from list_calendar_events. An agent can tell it apart from siblings like rotate_calendar_feed without opening either 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?

Explicitly says who this is for ('give to a human'), where they use it (Google/Apple/Outlook), and names the alternative with its condition ('for live state use list_calendar_events').

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