skylight_list_calendars

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds only that the result includes account providers and their 'active' calendars, which gives limited extra context about the shape of the return without deeper behavioral detail.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope ('calendar accounts and their active calendars') is stated up front.

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 low-complexity read-only listing tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. The main gap is the undocumented frameId parameter, but return-value detail is not required.

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 single parameter frameId has 0% schema description coverage and is never mentioned in the description. The agent cannot tell whether frameId is required (it is not marked required), what form it takes, or what happens when it is omitted.

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 ('List') and resource ('calendar accounts... and their active calendars'), with a helpful parenthetical naming account providers (Google/Apple). It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not differentiate itself from the closely-named sibling skylight_list_source_calendars, leaving an agent to guess which to call.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as skylight_list_source_calendars or skylight_get_calendar. The agent is left to infer context from the name alone.

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