get_event

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description is not responsible for the safety profile. It adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations by showing the POST endpoint, mentioning the optional userTimeZone, and noting that the summary should be presented first.

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 tightly packed sentences: purpose, usage condition, endpoint, optional parameter, and output-presentation note. Nothing is wasted, and the most important information is front-loaded in the first sentence.

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 simple single-event fetch with read-only annotations, the description provides sufficient selection and invocation cues. It omits full output-field details, but there is no output schema and the statement 'Fetch one event by id' plus 'Summary first' gives a reasonable picture of the result.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter semantics. It does by framing provider/accountId/calendarId/eventId as identifiers one already has, and by explicitly marking userTimeZone as optional. It could explain timezone format or the meaning of each ID further, but the names plus usage context largely compensate.

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 opens with 'Fetch one event by id', a specific verb and resource that directly distinguishes this singular lookup from siblings like get_events, search_events, and export_events. It makes the tool's scope unmistakable.

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 phrase 'Call when you already have provider/accountId/calendarId/eventId' gives an explicit precondition and clear context for when this tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the condition strongly implies the boundary.

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