skylight_get_event_notification_settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered structurally; the description adds essentially no behavioral context beyond restating the resource. It does not say what settings are returned, whether a frame must exist, or that the read is non-mutating.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than tightness.

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?

With no output schema, no parameter documentation, and no annotations covering return behavior, the description leaves an agent without enough to know what it will receive or how frameId resolves. For a getter that should describe the returned settings shape, this is thin.

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?

There is one parameter (frameId) with 0% schema description coverage and 0 required parameters, yet the description says nothing about how the frame is identified, whether frameId is optional, or what happens if it is omitted. The phrase 'the frame's' hints at frame scoping but does not resolve the optional/required ambiguity.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('the frame's calendar-event notification settings'), so an agent can tell this is the read side of the notification-settings pair rather than the update variant. It is clear but never names or contrasts with the sibling skylight_update_event_notification_settings, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no mention of the update counterpart, and no prerequisite or context is supplied. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the read operation.

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