calmesh_get_events

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the required 'read' scope and mentions returned fields, which is helpful, but it does not address ordering, timezone handling, pagination behavior, or empty-result semantics, leaving gaps.

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 three short sentences with the primary purpose front-loaded. Each sentence adds a distinct fact—purpose, return fields, and auth requirement—with no repetition or filler.

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 list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core essentials: what it does, the date range, returned fields, and required auth. It does not explicitly differentiate from get_event_details or note ordering, but the schema provides parameter detail and the description is otherwise adequate.

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 input schema has 100% descriptive coverage for all parameters, including examples for start and end, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, aside from implicitly connecting the date range to start/end.

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?

Description starts with a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'calendar events' scoped by a date range, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_event_details which targets a single event. It also lists returned fields, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 date-range wording implies when to use the tool, but no explicit alternatives, exclusions, or conditions are mentioned. Sibling tools such as get_event_details exist, yet the description does not guide users toward or away from them.

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