get_calendar_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type (JSON string) and the content categories (workouts, notes, races, goals), but does not mention side effects, permissions, or pagination behavior. For a read-only get tool, the disclosure is adequate but not rich.

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 and well-organized with a summary sentence, Args list, and Returns line. Every sentence adds value, and the structure matches the schema, making it easy to scan. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so return value details are covered. The description explains the scope of the data (time period, content types) sufficiently for a simple read tool. It lacks guidance on when to prefer this over siblings like get_upcoming_workouts, but that is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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% and both parameters (days_ahead, days_back) are already described in the schema. The description repeats the same information in the Args section, adding no new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Thus baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get') and resource ('planned events and workouts from the calendar'), and clarifies the content includes workouts, notes, races, and goals. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_upcoming_workouts, which focus only on workouts, and from event CRUD tools.

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 implies usage for retrieving calendar events over a time period, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_upcoming_workouts or get_event. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are provided, so guidance is only implied.

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