calendrier_evenements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the optional date-scoping behavior, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or result volume for a listing tool that could return many events.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that covers resource, examples, and the optional filter with no filler. The word 'éventuellement' is slightly vague but costs almost nothing in length.

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 full schema coverage and no output schema, the essentials are present. Still, it never hints at what an event entry contains or how results are scoped/limited, so it is adequate but not fully self-sufficient.

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%: depuis, jusqu_au and calendrier_id are each documented in-schema, including the 'Absent = tous les calendriers' default. The description's date-range clause merely echoes the schema, adding no format or boundary semantics beyond it.

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 names a concrete resource ('Événements des calendriers') and gives concrete examples (réunions, sorties, vacances), so an agent knows it retrieves calendar events rather than calendars themselves. It is distinguishable from the sibling calendrier_lister by resource, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

'éventuellement entre deux dates' implies the date filter is optional, which is real usage guidance for the temporal scope. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs calendrier_lister (which lists calendars) and no stated prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the choice to inference.

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