Get Event

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

Annotations supply readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is already declared. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by explaining how occurrenceDate affects targeting a single instance of a recurring series. It doesn't cover error cases or permissions, but the annotation lowers the bar.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every clause adds value. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers the primary use case and the recurring-series nuance, and the readOnly annotation helps. However, with no output schema and three undocumented identifier parameters, the description does not fully explain how to choose among identifiers or what the return looks like. It is adequate but with clear gaps.

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 only 25% (only occurrenceDate has a description). The main description mentions occurrenceDate but does not clarify the roles of eventIdentifier, externalIdentifier, and calendarItemIdentifier, which are left as bare names. This fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 ('Fetch') and resource ('a single event'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like calendar_list_events (plural) and calendar_create_event. It also adds precision about targeting occurrences of a recurring series.

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 implies when to use the tool (to fetch a specific event by identifier, as opposed to listing events) and gives concrete guidance for a common edge case (occurrenceDate for recurring series). However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool.

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