list-events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'List' implies a read operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, how results are ordered, if pagination is supported, what happens with large result sets, or the format of returned data. For a list tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple list tool and front-loads the core functionality.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what the output looks like (e.g., list format, included fields), doesn't address authentication requirements, and provides minimal guidance on usage. For a list tool in a calendar context with multiple sibling tools, more context 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?

The description mentions 'optional filtering' which aligns with the parameters in the schema, but adds no specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description doesn't enhance understanding of parameter interactions, default behaviors, or filtering logic.

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 ('List') and resource ('calendar events'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'get-event' or 'find-person' which might also retrieve event-related information, so it doesn't achieve the highest score.

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 mentions 'optional filtering' which implies some context for usage, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get-event' (for single events) or 'find-person' (which might find events indirectly). There's no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or typical use cases.

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