get-calendar-event

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only (readOnlyHint=true) and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioural context: it notes that event bodies are returned only in HTML format, mentions cross-calendar access scenarios, and points out that extensions are supported. This adds value beyond the annotations.

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 relatively concise: two sentences plus an extra sentence about extensions. The main purpose is front-loaded. However, the third sentence about extensions could be integrated more succinctly.

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?

Given the tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the core purpose and some behavioural aspects (HTML format, cross-calendar). However, it does not explain return values, error conditions, or pagination behavior (though 'fetchAllPages' parameter is described in schema). It is adequate but could be more 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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides for parameters. It does not explain parameter interactions or provide usage examples.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'properties and relationships of the specified event object'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list-calendar-events' and 'get-specific-calendar-event' by specifying the event object and mentioning cross-calendar scenarios.

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 description mentions two scenarios for getting events in another user's calendar but does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools like 'list-calendar-events' or 'get-specific-calendar-event'. Usage guidance is implied but not explicit about when to prefer this tool over siblings.

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