ews_find_calendar_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It clearly labels the tool as 'Read-only' and specifies return metadata (id and changekey), but does not cover authorization requirements or potential side effects.

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, each adding value: first sentence defines purpose and nature, second sentence details return metadata. No redundant or irrelevant information.

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?

For a search tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers key behavioral aspects (read-only, return metadata). It lacks details on pagination or error handling, but the schema fills in parameter specifics.

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 coverage is 86%, and the schema already has detailed descriptions for each parameter. The description adds minimal new meaning beyond stating 'time window' for start/end. No further parameter guidance is provided.

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 provides a specific verb ('search') and resource ('calendar events'), clearly distinguishing this read-only tool from sibling mutation tools like ews_create_meeting_confirmed. It explicitly mentions the EWS id and changekey metadata, which are unique to this tool.

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 states the tool is for 'safe preview-confirm update or cancel flows,' giving context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or compare with siblings like ews_suggest_slots or ews_get_free_busy.

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