calendarListEvents

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the time format (10-digit Unix seconds) but doesn't describe pagination behavior (despite page_size and page_token parameters), rate limits, authentication requirements, error conditions, or what the output looks like. '列出' (list) implies read-only, but this isn't explicitly stated. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond basic functionality.

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 appropriately concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the core functionality, and the second provides specific format guidance for two parameters. There's no wasted text, though it could be more front-loaded with critical information. The structure is efficient for its limited content.

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 5 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It explains time format but misses pagination behavior, authentication, error handling, and output structure. For a list operation with multiple parameters and no structured documentation, this leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to understand proper 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only explains start_time and end_time parameters (format: 10-digit Unix seconds), leaving calendar_id, page_size, and page_token completely undocumented. With 5 parameters total and only 2 partially explained, the description fails to provide adequate parameter semantics beyond what's minimally implied by the tool name.

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 action ('列出' - list) and resource ('日程' - events/calendar events) with specific scope ('指定日历在时间区间内' - specified calendar within time range). It distinguishes from siblings like calendarCreateEvent (create) and calendarListCalendars (list calendars), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other listing tools. The purpose is specific but could be more distinctive.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., authentication), when to choose this over other event-related tools, or any constraints beyond the time range parameters. There's no comparison to siblings like feishu_calendar_event or feishu_calendar_freebusy.

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