get-calendar-event

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral details: it notes that event bodies are returned in only HTML format and that the tool can retrieve custom properties and extension data. This provides additional transparency 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 concise with three sentences, each serving a clear purpose: stating the main function, noting a constraint, and explaining an additional capability. There is no redundancy or unnecessary information.

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?

The description explains the tool's purpose and mentions the ability to get custom properties, but it does not explicitly describe the return shape or structure of the event object. Given that there is no output schema and the tool has several parameters, the description could be more complete about what the response contains.

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?

All input schema parameters have descriptions, so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add any additional meaning to the parameters; it relies on the schema's descriptions. A baseline score of 3 is appropriate given this high coverage.

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 that the tool retrieves the properties and relationships of a specified event object. It also mentions a specific behavioral detail (HTML-only body) and scenarios for accessing events in another user's calendar. However, it does not differentiate itself from the sibling tool 'get-specific-calendar-event', which has a very similar name.

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 provides some context about when to use this tool (e.g., to get custom properties and extension data), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'get-specific-calendar-event' or 'list-calendar-events'. No guidance on when not to use it is given.

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