calendar_week

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does convey read intent via 'Get' and describes optional account behavior ('Omit for default account'). It does not address auth, timezone handling, or empty-week behavior, but the operation is a simple read and the gap is moderate.

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 definition is compact and front-loaded: the purpose and week boundary come first, followed by the single argument explanation. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 one optional parameter and an existing output schema, the description is mostly complete for successful invocation. It could be stronger by explicitly distinguishing it from calendar_today or noting read-only guarantees, but no critical usage detail is missing.

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%, yet the description fully explains the only parameter: account is an email address and can be omitted for the default account. This fully compensates for the bare schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('this week's calendar events') and an explicit boundary ('Monday through Sunday'). It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like calendar_today and calendar_create_event.

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 clearly signals when to use it: to retrieve this week's events, with an optional account selection. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusionary guidance.

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