skylight_list_source_calendars

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile and the fact that external services are involved are covered. The description adds the useful detail that these are linked external sources (Google, etc.), but says nothing about pagination, result volume, or what a frame with no linked sources returns.

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 efficient sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized, though its brevity is close to 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?

For a read-only list tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema to explain, this is minimally adequate. The gaps are the undocumented frameId and the absence of any disambiguation from skylight_list_calendars, both of which an agent needs to select and call this correctly.

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 a single parameter, frameId, with 0% schema description coverage, so the description carries the burden. 'For a frame' weakly implies frameId scopes the listing, but it never states the expected ID format, nor clarifies that frameId is optional per the schema. Compensation for the coverage gap is minimal.

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 a specific resource ('linked source calendars (Google, etc.) for a frame'), which is concrete and understandable. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the nearby sibling skylight_list_calendars or explain what makes a 'source' calendar distinct from a regular calendar.

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 exclusions, and no pointer to alternatives such as skylight_list_calendars or skylight_get_calendar. The phrase 'for a frame' hints at scope but the agent is left to infer whether this is the right tool versus the other calendar-listing siblings.

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