List upcoming events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals the default 30-day range, expansion of recurring events, and the 400-day limit. These are meaningful traits beyond the schema, though it omits details like date format or pagination.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the primary action stated first. Each sentence adds a distinct piece of information: purpose, default behavior, and a constraint.

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 an output schema exists and annotations are absent, the description covers the essential operational aspects: what the tool does, default range, recurrence expansion, and rejection of long ranges. The main gap is parameter format guidance, but overall the context is largely 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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It mentions 'time range' and defaults but never maps start_date/end_date to the range bounds or explains calendar_name's role. The constraint on long ranges is behavioral, not parameter-specific.

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 ('Fetch events'), the resource ('iCloud calendar'), and the scope ('within a time range'). It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like create_event, get_event, and delete_event.

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 gives helpful context (time range, default period, rejection of long ranges) but never explicitly tells the agent when to choose this over get_event or list_calendars. The intended use case is implied but not contrasted with alternatives.

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