list_calendar_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it names the source (Google Calendar, Outlook), the returned fields, the status enum semantics, and the non-obvious behavior that organizer edits update events in place and reset `my_status` to 'needs-action'. It omits auth/permission requirements and pagination, keeping it from 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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then dense supporting detail in three tidy sentences. Every sentence adds information, though the field enumeration is slightly list-like and could be trimmed for a tool this simple.

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, and the description usefully documents the return shape (id, title, start/end in UTC, organizer, attendees, status, my_status). It is complete on the output side but leaves the two input parameters undocumented, which is the notable gap.

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% and neither of the two parameters is addressed: `address` is only obliquely implied by 'an inbox's calendar', and `include_cancelled` is never explained despite the description discussing cancelled status. The description does not compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 ('List the meetings on an inbox's calendar') plus ordering ('soonest first'), and the data-source clause scopes it away from sibling list tools like get_calendar_feed or read_messages.

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?

Gives clear context (calendar invitations this inbox received) and cross-references read_messages where the same data appears under `calendar_event`, but never states an explicit when-not-to-use or names the alternative tool for the same task.

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