get_event

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the output field list and the fact that details are returned as JSON, which is useful but does not disclose edge-case behavior such as not-found handling.

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 one-line purpose statement is followed by compact Args and Returns sections with no redundant prose. Every line earns its place and the key lookup-by-UID behavior is front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple, has only two required parameters, an output schema, and safety annotations. The description covers prerequisites, parameter semantics, and the expected return structure, leaving no essential gap for an agent to call it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates by defining calendar_id with an example and event_uid with guidance on how to obtain UIDs via get_events. Both parameters are given meaning beyond their raw types.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('Get full details of a specific calendar event by its UID'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling list tool get_events by specifying a single event looked up by UID.

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 explicitly tells the agent to use get_events to find UIDs, establishing the prerequisite workflow. It does not formally list when not to use it, but for a simple retrieval-by-ID tool the context is clear and no misleading alternatives are suggested.

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