import_calendar_facts

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'import into local storage' without explaining idempotency, duplicate handling, or whether subsequent calls overwrite or append. Critical behavioral traits are missing.

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 two sentences plus a list, efficiently conveying the purpose and required fields. The list could be better integrated, but overall it is concise and front-loaded.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not describe the return value, error handling, or what 'normalized' means. For a tool with a complex array parameter, more detail is needed.

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 lists the expected fields for the 'facts' array (fact_type, date, source, etc.), adding meaning beyond the generic 'additionalProperties: true' schema. However, the 'db_path' parameter is not described, and the structure of each fact object remains vague.

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 verb 'import' and the resource 'normalized calendar facts' into 'local storage'. The tool name and description together distinguish it from sibling import tools like 'import_todoist_obligations'.

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 explicitly states a precondition: 'source-specific calendar import to happen before the call.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool, but does not mention when not to use it or provide alternatives.

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