List meetings you created

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: sort order (newest first), that cancelled events are included and flagged by status, that attendee answers are present, and that it changes nothing. It stops short of describing result size or any limits, but for a zero-param read tool 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?

Three tight sentences: what it returns first, then how to use it and what sibling to prefer, then the exclusion and the return shape. Every clause carries information and nothing is repeated from the annotations or schema.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description supplies the missing pieces an agent needs: scope, ordering, inclusion of cancelled items, and the return envelope { events }. Nothing required to call or interpret it is absent.

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 tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies no filtering input is available, which is consistent with the empty schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource with scope: 'all meetings this mailbox created with create_event', plus ordering ('newest first') and content ('including cancelled ones (status) and attendee answers'). It also explicitly excludes invitations from others, so an agent can distinguish it from list_messages and get_event without opening a schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('find an event id you lost'), names the sibling alternative for a different case ('use get_event for one event'), and states the exclusion plus where the excluded data lives ('Invitations from others are not listed here; they arrive as messages (see read_message)'). Routing is unambiguous.

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