get_event

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 discloses the output contents ('Returns all summary fields plus location, description, organizer, attendees (with name and status), and recurrence IDs') and error behavior ('Returns an error if the event ID does not exist'), which adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 three sentences, with the main purpose front-loaded in the first sentence. It packs essential information—when to use, return payload, and error condition—without unnecessary detail.

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-parameter read operation, the description fully covers the tool's behavior: what it returns, when to use it, and when it fails. It is complete despite the lack of an output schema.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage, including a description for event_id that mentions 'e.g., from list_events or search_events'. The description reinforces this usage context but does not add additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states 'Get full details of a single calendar event,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by referencing list_events and search_events as prior steps, and by focusing on full details for one 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?

It explicitly instructs to 'Use this after list_events or search_events,' providing clear contextual guidance and naming alternative tools. It also implies the alternative is to use those tools for listing/searching rather than getting full details, covering the when and alternatives.

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