kaiten_list_calendars

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only promises an unqualified list and says nothing about pagination defaults, ordering, scoping, filtering, or return shape. The limit/offset parameters imply pagination, but the description does not confirm how it behaves.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It contains no front-loaded detail beyond the tool's own name and provides no additional information to help an agent select or invoke the tool.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description should explain what the listed calendars are and what the response contains. It does neither, leaving the tool's scope, return format, and semantics ambiguous. The optional pagination params are the only concrete context available.

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 input schema already fully documents both parameters as 'Max results' and 'Pagination offset', so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-level detail, which lands at the baseline score of 3 for high schema 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 states the operation ('List') and the resource ('calendars'), so an agent knows this is a read-only enumeration. However, it adds almost no nuance beyond the tool name, and with the sibling kaiten_get_calendar it does not clarify whether this returns all accessible calendars, user calendars, or calendars in a specific context.

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?

No guidance is given for when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention kaiten_get_calendar for retrieving a single calendar, nor does it state any conditions that would favor list over get. An agent must infer usage purely from naming conventions.

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