Search AddEvent Calendars

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

Annotations already signal read-only and idempotent behavior; the description adds valuable context: empty result semantics ('An empty "calendars" array means no matches, not an error'), error handling for invalid sort combinations, and pagination behavior. This exceeds the annotation baseline.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (intro, Args, Returns, Examples, Error Handling). Each section is concise and serves a purpose; no redundant fluff. Front-loaded with the primary purpose and non-mutation guarantee.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description provides the return shape, pagination details, empty-result semantics, and error handling. For a 5-parameter tool with rich sibling context, this is fully self-contained and 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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100%), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the sort_order dependency (error for invalid combination), showing how calendar_ids is used in an example, and clarifying pagination defaults. This warrants a 4.

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 'Searches calendars you've previously created' with an explicit exclusion 'Does NOT create or modify calendars.' This distinguishes it from mutation tools and other search/list tools in the sibling set.

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?

Provides clear use cases via examples ('What calendars do we have set up?' and 'Find the calendar_id for the WREIA calendar') and explicitly notes it is not for creating/modifying. However, it does not directly contrast with get_calendar, so differentiation from a single-calendar fetch is implied rather than explicit.

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