timetree_list_calendars

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

The description uses 'Read', which clearly signals a non-mutating operation, and 'authenticated' indicates that a valid session is required. It does not explicitly state effects like needing an existing login, whether a failed authentication returns an error, or that no data will be changed, so the behavioral disclosure is adequate but minimal.

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 sentence that clearly states the action, scope, and resource with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and immediately parseable by an agent.

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?

This is a simple zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, so a much longer description is not necessary. The text sufficiently conveys read-only access to the authenticated account's calendars, though it does not specify the exact shape of returned calendar objects. For the tool's low complexity, this is adequate.

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 input schema has zero properties and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters needing documentation. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed; the baseline for zero parameters is appropriately high.

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 'Read the calendars available in the authenticated TimeTree account' clearly identifies a specific verb (Read), resource (calendars), and context (authenticated TimeTree account). It is unambiguous and easily distinguished from sibling tools like timetree_list_events and timetree_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 phrase 'available in the authenticated TimeTree account' implies this is the read-only enumeration tool for the current account, but the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. Usage guidance is present only by implication.

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