ghl_get_calendar

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It simply says 'Get a specific calendar by ID' without disclosing behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or return structure. The description adds no information beyond the obvious action.

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?

The description is a single short sentence with no extraneous content. For a tool with one parameter and a straightforward operation, this length is efficient, though it is also minimal in substantive detail.

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 get-by-ID operation, the description is minimally viable but lacks helpful context. It does not cross-reference sibling tools like 'ghl_get_calendars' for listing, nor does it explain what a calendar resource contains or any expected output. The absence of an output schema increases the burden on the description, which it does not fully meet.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The only parameter 'calendarId' is minimally explained as 'by ID', which tells the agent it is an identifier, but does not specify format, source, or how to obtain valid values. The schema already defines the type as string, so the description provides little additional meaning.

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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves a single calendar by ID, using the verb 'Get' and the resource 'specific calendar'. It hints at differentiation from the sibling 'ghl_get_calendars' (plural) through the word 'specific', but does not explicitly name or contrast with that alternative.

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 'by ID' implies the tool should be used when one has a calendar identifier, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools like 'ghl_get_calendars' (list all) or 'ghl_get_calendar_groups' (list groups). Usage context is only implied, not stated.

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