enrich_calendar_event

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

No annotations exist, so description must carry full burden. It lists what data is fetched (attendees, transcript, AI insights) but does not disclose permissions needed, rate limits, or how data is processed. Parameter booleans imply optional inclusion, but overall behavioral details are minimal.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads purpose. It is clear and efficient, though could be slightly more concise. No unnecessary words.

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 9 parameters and no output schema, the description should explain return structure or how to use output_variable_name. It lacks guidance on what the enriched data looks like or how to utilize it, making it incomplete for a complex tool.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description repeats the parameter list but does not add new meaning beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate; no significant improvement over schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool enriches a calendar event with comprehensive details (attendees, notes, transcript, AI insights) and specifies supported providers (Google/Outlook). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_calendar_events_list which only lists events.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., meeting_followup_analyze_transcript). Usage context is only implied by the mention of 'comprehensive details', but no when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations are provided.

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