refresh_calendars

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the annotations, specifically the non-fatal error handling ('connection whose provider errors is skipped'). This is useful for an operation that might have partial failures. The annotations do not contradict the description.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and the second sentence adds essential error-handling detail. No unnecessary 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?

For a simple no-parameter refresh tool, the description adequately explains the purpose, scope, and failure handling. An output schema exists, so returning details are covered. No gaps apparent.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description doesn't need to explain parameter meaning. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description still conveys what the no-arg call does.

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 clearly states the tool re-discovers calendars across all connected accounts, using a specific verb ('re-discover') and resource ('calendars') with explicit scope ('ALL connected accounts'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_calendars and discover_calendars by emphasizing the global, updated scan.

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?

It implies when to use the tool: to pick up calendars created since account connection. It also clarifies that a connection with errors is skipped, providing a clear context. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, which prevents a 5.

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