Show Calendar Item

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. Description adds 'Returns a JSON object' but does not elaborate on pagination parameters (page, per_page) that appear in the schema, which may confuse. No contradiction with 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?

Three sentences, first one clearly states purpose, second gives usage directive, third provides API source. No unnecessary words, but term 'records' (plural) for a single item is slightly inconsistent. Overall appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 read tool with comprehensive annotations and schema, the description provides essential context (purpose, usage, required params, API endpoint). It does not explain the return structure (no output schema) but annotations mitigate that. Presence of page/per_page is not addressed, but not critical for basic usage.

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% with all parameters described. Description lists required parameters (project_id, id) but adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema already handles parameter documentation.

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 'Get the details of a single Calendar Item' and 'fetch the full details of a specific Schedule (Legacy) records by its identifier'. It uses a specific verb (get) and resource (calendar item), and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_calendar_items (plural) and create_calendar_item.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Schedule (Legacy) records by its identifier', which tells when to use it. It implies alternatives (list for multiple), but does not explicitly state when not to use it. Required parameters are listed, providing prerequisites.

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