get_calendar_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that it retrieves events, but does not disclose behavioral details such as whether all calendars are searched when no calendarId is given, pagination, ordering, or inclusion of canceled appointments. This is a significant gap for a tool with no structured safety hints.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and object, with zero fluff. It is concise and well-structured, though it could have included more guidance without becoming verbose.

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 the tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify the return format, whether filtering is optional, or how it relates to get_appointment (singular). An agent may invoke it incorrectly without knowing the default scope (e.g., all calendars) or how to limit results.

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%, so all five parameters already have descriptions. The description adds the concept of 'date range', which maps to startTime/endTime, but does not elaborate on the filter parameters (userId, groupId, calendarId) beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the parameter semantics.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'calendar events/appointments', with scope restricted to a date range. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_appointment (singular event) and get_calendars (calendar metadata), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 clearly implies use when retrieving events within a date range. However, it does not explicitly contrast with get_appointment for single events or mention when not to use it (e.g., for free-slot queries). The context is clear but lacks exclusions or alternatives.

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