Get Calendar Events

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

Annotations already establish a safe read (readOnlyHint=true). The description goes beyond that by disclosing the partial-overlap inclusion rule, the participant_count field, that include_participants is required to get invitees and responses, and that returned timestamps carry time zones. Pagination and result-size limits are still unmentioned, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Four short sentences, no padding, and the core scope statement comes first. The participant and time-zone guidance are earned additions rather than restatements, though the sentence on time zones is slightly advisory rather than instructional.

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?

With an output schema present and full schema description coverage, the description only needs to add semantics — and it does: range inclusion, the participants opt-in, and time-zone awareness. Only pagination/nonexistent-results behavior is arguably left unaddressed.

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%, so all five parameters are already documented, including the inclusive/exclusive boundary on start_time and end_time. The description adds the 'why' for include_participants but nothing new about calendars or fulcra_userid, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Retrieve the user's calendar events') and pins the scope with 'within a time range', then clarifies the inclusion rule ('occur at least partially during the range'). That distinguishes it from get_calendars, which enumerates calendars rather than events, though the description 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?

Gives operational guidance on the include_participants flag ('pass ... when you need who was invited and their responses') and on timestamp handling, which is genuinely useful. However, it offers no when-to-use/when-not guidance relative to alternatives such as get_calendars or get_records, so routing among siblings is left to inference.

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