List local calendar drafts and creation attempts for this iCloud account in reverse chronological order, so users can review, clean up, or resume pending events.
List this account's local calendar drafts and creation attempts, newest first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| arguments | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope (account-local only, newest-first ordering, includes failed creation attempts) but says nothing about pagination or result size, so it is a modest add over the structured data.
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?
One sentence, zero filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the ordering constraint is tacked on efficiently at the end.
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?
For a simple read-only list tool with no output schema this is minimally adequate, but it omits pagination behavior and the default page size of 20, both relevant to calling it correctly. Nothing is misleading, but it is not complete.
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 reported as 0%; 'limit' carries only default/max/min and 'before' is a cursor. The description never mentions the page size or the pagination cursor, so an agent gets no help on either parameter from prose. It does not compensate for the coverage 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 precise verb (List), a specific resource (this account's local calendar drafts) and even the ordering (newest first), plus the subtle inclusion of 'creation attempts'. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like calendar_list or calendar_read, so it falls short of a 5.
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 purpose implies when to use it (you want to see stored drafts), but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives such as calendar_list or calendar_search for non-draft data. Usage is inferable rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.