Get Calendar By ID

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds context about the return type (JSON object) and the API endpoint, but does not contradict annotations. It provides moderate additional value beyond the structured metadata.

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 paragraph with concise, front-loaded sentences. Each sentence adds value: purpose, alternative guidance, return type, required params, and API location. No redundancy or wasted 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?

Given no output schema, the description explains the return format ('JSON object describing the requested Scheduling records'). It covers the tool's purpose, alternative usage, and API version. The presence of pagination parameters (page, per_page) in the schema is not addressed, but the description's focus on a single record makes this a minor omission. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a simple get-by-id 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 coverage is 100% for all five parameters. The description merely repeats the required parameters without adding semantic details beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the parameter documentation burden.

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 its ID using the verb 'Get' and specifies the resource ('calendar by id'). It also mentions the return format (JSON object) and distinguishes itself by advising when to use the Show Project API instead, providing clear differentiation from a sibling tool.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool ('fetch full details of a specific Scheduling records') and when not to (use Show Project API for time zone interpretation). It also lists the required parameters, providing clear context for invocation.

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