Search Calendar

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only (readOnlyHint=true). The description adds behavioral context by specifying that it searches within a date range and by textual fields. However, it does not disclose characteristics like case sensitivity, fuzzy search support, or pagination behavior. With annotations handling the safety profile, this additional context is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, succinct sentence that conveys the core functionality without any extraneous information. It is front-loaded and efficient, earning its place with no wasted words.

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 the tool has five parameters, 0% schema description, and an output schema, the description covers the main purpose but lacks details about parameter formats (e.g., date string format, limit maximum) and usage boundaries. It is minimally adequate for a search tool but incomplete for effective autonomous invocation.

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 explains that 'query' searches by title, location, or notes, but does not clarify the 'start', 'end', 'limit', or 'calendar_uid' parameters. The 'date range' hint partially covers start/end but lacks format specification. Overall, parameter semantics are insufficiently explained for all five parameters.

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 specifies the verb 'Search', the resource 'events', and the searchable fields ('title, location, or notes') with a date range constraint. This differentiates the tool from siblings like calendar_list_events or contacts_search, making its purpose 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 description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as calendar_list_events, calendar_events_for_date, or calendar_find_free_time. There is no explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' context, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the action name and purpose.

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