List calendar events

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: newest-window ordering, recurring-event expansion when start/end are supplied, and different behavior when they are omitted. It does not discuss return shape or limits, but with annotations covering safety this is solid.

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 dense sentences with no waste. The main behavior is front-loaded, and each clause adds useful invocation guidance.

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 listing tool with complete schema descriptions and clear annotations, the description covers the key invocation modes and scoping behavior. Minor ambiguity remains around what 'upcoming/raw events' means and how results are bounded beyond the limit parameter, but nothing critical 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so parameter documentation is already strong. The description still adds meaningful semantics by explaining that start and end should be paired to define a window, that omitting them lists upcoming/raw events, and that calendar_id optionally scopes results. It does not elaborate on limit, but the schema covers that adequately.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List events') and states notable scope behaviors such as time windows, recurring event expansion, and optional calendar scoping. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_event or get_free_busy.

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 gives explicit invocation guidance: provide start and end for a time window with recurring events expanded, or omit them for upcoming/raw events. It also says calendar scoping is optional. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or named alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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