get_calendar_events

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

There are no annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get' and the date range; it does not disclose defaults, timezone handling, recurrence behavior, result limits, or what happens when no events exist. This is minimal coverage for a tool with no annotation support.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Every word contributes meaning.

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 description is minimally viable for a simple retrieval tool, but with no output schema or annotations it leaves behavioral and return-value details undisclosed. An agent can call it correctly based on the schema, but may not know what to expect in response or how edge cases are handled.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces that startTime and endTime define a range, but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, especially for the optional mailbox parameter.

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 a clear verb and resource ('Get calendar events') with an explicit temporal scope ('between two datetimes'). It is unambiguous about what the tool does, though it does not directly name or differentiate itself from sibling tools like get_upcoming_events.

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 phrase 'between two datetimes' gives clear context for when to use this tool: when a specific date/time range is needed. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the usage context is evident from the description.

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