School calendar events

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral details beyond the read-only annotation: recurring events are expanded, there is a fallback to HTML, and empty calendar results trigger explanatory guidance about image/PDF calendars. This is valuable context not available from annotations or schema alone.

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 concise and front-loaded, using two sentences to convey the core function, source, recurrence handling, fallback behavior, and empty-state guidance. Every clause adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity and rich output schema, the description is complete: it identifies the data source, recurrence expansion, date-range behavior, fallback path, and handling of empty results. No critical usage context is missing.

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 provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three parameters (query, days_back, days_ahead). The description adds little parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves structured calendar events from a specific source (ParentSquare ICS feed) with a scope (date range, recurring events expanded). The verb 'get' plus the resource 'calendar events' is specific and distinguishes this from the broad sibling tool list.

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 provides clear context for when the tool is appropriate: it pulls from the ICS subscription feed and falls back to the HTML calendar view. It also mentions an alternative for calendars posted as image/PDF attachments in empty cases, though it doesn't explicitly exclude other sibling tools.

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