get_calendar_labels

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It correctly implies this is a read operation ('Get'), but does not explicitly state it has no side effects, requires no special permissions, or has rate limits. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but could be more explicit.

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, concise sentence (6 words) that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without extraneous information. Every word contributes meaning.

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?

The description lists the returned fields (IDs, names, colors, ordering) but does not specify the data structure (e.g., array of objects, flat list) or any pagination. Since there is no output schema, more detail on the return format would be helpful. However, for a simple label resource, the current level is acceptable.

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% for the single 'calendar_id' parameter, and the schema already describes it as 'The calendar ID'. The tool description adds minimal context by referencing 'TimeTree calendar labels', which implies the parameter identifies which calendar. This aligns with the baseline score for high-coverage schemas.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('TimeTree calendar labels'), and lists the specific attributes returned (IDs, names, colors, ordering). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'list_calendars' (which fetches calendars) and 'update_calendar_labels' (which modifies them).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., when to call 'get_calendar_labels' vs 'update_calendar_labels' or 'list_calendars'). A simple note about its read-only nature or typical use case (before updating labels) would improve the score.

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