List calendars

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

Annotations already declaratively cover read-only and idempotence, so the description does not need to restate those. It adds useful scoping behavior ('user can see', role-based filtering) beyond the schema, but does not discuss additional behavioral concerns like auth or rate limits; this matches the lower bar for annotation-covered tools.

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 compact, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and the parameter list is structured and free of fluff. Each sentence contributes meaningful content, though the text is slightly verbose with two separate ID-related mentions.

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?

A two optional-parameter list for which the description covers purpose, parameter defaults, allowed values, and usage conditions, with an output schema available. No information needed to correctly invoke the tool for the common discovery workflow is missing.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully compensates: it explains each parameter's meaning, gives allowed roles for 'min_access_role', describes the 'at least' semantics, and tells how to obtain or omit 'account'. This is enough to call the tool correctly in every scenario.

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?

First sentence uses a specific verb and resource: 'List the calendars the signed-in user can see,' and it specifies key output fields ('IDs and timezones'). The 'Start here...' guidance ties it to other tools and distinguishes it from sibling operations.

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 'Start here whenever the user mentions a calendar other than their own' provides an explicit when-to-use condition, and the note that returned IDs feed other tools' calendar_id helps coordination. It does not explicitly list when-not-to-use conditions or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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