get_calendar_connect_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'Get OAuth authorization URL' without explaining behavioral traits: the URL is temporary, requires user authorization, and may expire. It also does not disclose side effects (e.g., a pending connection state). The description is too minimal to inform an agent about the tool's behavior beyond the basic action.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the key action. It is concise and avoids unnecessary words. However, it could briefly mention the OAuth flow context without becoming verbose. Still, it earns its place with no waste.

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?

Given the tool's role in an OAuth flow (two parameters, output schema exists), the description lacks critical context: it does not explain that the URL is used to redirect a user for authorization, that it is part of a multi-step process, or that the redirect_url parameter is critical for the callback. The schema and output schema help, but the tool description is insufficient for an agent to understand the full context.

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 description coverage is 100%: both parameters have detailed descriptions in the schema (redirect_url: 'Where to redirect after OAuth authorization'; calendar_type: provider with correct values). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Per guidelines, baseline is 3, and no extra value is provided.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get OAuth authorization URL to connect a calendar.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('OAuth authorization URL'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_calendars (which lists calendars) or check_calendar_connection (which checks connection status). No ambiguity.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that this URL is needed before calling check_calendar_connection, or that it requires user interaction. Sibling tools like add_selected_calendar or set_destination_calendar also exist, but no context is given about the OAuth flow sequence.

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