deputy_get_my_calendar_url

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

Although annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, the description adds substantial behavioral context: it reads only the caller's own /me record, works at any access level, stays in sync with roster changes, returns markdown or a JSON object, and never prints the secret iCal feed URL. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 purpose is front-loaded, and every subsequent sentence adds distinct operational, security, or output-format context. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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 fully covers tool selection, read-only behavior, access-level guarantees, output format variants, null handling, and the security nuance around the secret iCal URL. An agent has everything needed to call this tool correctly and avoid misuse.

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 schema already fully documents response_format with enum values and a default description, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond by specifying the exact JSON shape ({'calendar_url'}), the null possibility, and the markdown-mode behavior, which adds meaningful semantic value.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: return the signed-in user's personal Deputy calendar (iCal) subscription URL. It also explicitly distinguishes this from sibling tools like deputy_get_my_roster and deputy_next_shift, which read shifts rather than return a subscription link.

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 contains an explicit 'When NOT to use' section that names the alternative tools for reading shifts and clarifies that this tool only returns the subscription link. This gives the agent clear selection criteria with no inference required.

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