calmesh_get_event_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses key behavioral traits: it 'Fetches from calendar providers on demand' (indicating a network call) and requires 'read' scope (implying read-only). It also lists the returned fields. While it doesn't cover error handling or rate limits, the disclosure is adequate for a simple read tool.

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 two sentences: first defines the purpose, second adds usage guidance and scope requirement. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy. Front-loaded with the specific verb and resource.

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 3-param tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides purpose, usage, behavior, and prerequisites. Slight ambiguity remains in 'full event details' vs the three listed fields, and it does not mention the number of events returned for a range, but overall it is nearly complete.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for each param (slug, start, end) including format examples. The description only mentions 'for a date range', which maps to start/end but adds no additional meaning. Per the baseline, with high schema coverage, a 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 verb ('Get'), resource ('full event details'), and scope ('for a date range'), with specific fields listed in parentheses. It distinguishes from sibling `calmesh_get_events` by emphasizing 'not just when they occur', making the tool's unique purpose explicit.

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?

It explicitly provides a when-to-use: 'Use this when you need to understand what events are about' and implies when-not-to-use ('not just when they occur'). However, it does not name an alternative tool explicitly, only implying the existence of a separate tool for occurrence times. Also mentions 'Requires read scope' as a prerequisite. Clear context but lacks an explicit alternative.

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