kaiten_get_calendar

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

With no annotations provided, the description must stand alone. 'Get' clearly signals a read/retrieval operation and implies no side effects, but the description does not disclose response shape, permissions, or error behavior. It is minimally transparent but not misleading.

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?

Seven words and no filler; the verb-resource-ID structure is front-loaded and every word earns its place. This is an appropriately small description for a one-parameter getter.

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 tool is simple and the schema covers the only parameter, so the core invocation is clear. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description does not clarify what the response contains or what permissions are needed, leaving a moderate gap.

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?

The schema already fully documents calendar_id as a UUID, and the description only restates 'by ID' without adding format, source, or usage details. At 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('calendar'), and 'specific ... by ID' distinguishes this retrieval tool from the list_calendars sibling. It lacks a little explicit context about what a calendar is, but the operation is unambiguous.

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 phrasing implies this tool should be used when a calendar ID is already known, but it never states when to prefer list_calendars or another sibling. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, so guidance is merely implied.

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