list_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return shape ({items, count, hasMore}) and pagination behavior ('increment offset by limit when hasMore is true'), which are key behavioral traits. It does not cover potential side effects, but as a read-only list operation, this is sufficient and valuable.

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, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence earns its place: purpose, return shape/pagination, and filter guidance plus pointer to get_event. No fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 list tool with no output schema and five parameters, the description covers essential invocation details: pagination, filtering, and how to get full event details. It is complete enough for an agent to call the tool correctly without additional context.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining relationships: 'Filter by date range (start_date + end_date in ISO 8601) and/or calendar_id (from list_calendars).' This clarifies how parameters combine and where calendar_id comes from, going beyond individual schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('calendar events') and scope ('optional date range or calendar filtering'). It distinguishes from siblings by noting it returns a paginated list and explicitly points to get_event for full details, making its role unique.

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 clear context for when to use this tool (listing with filters and pagination) and provides an explicit alternative: 'Use get_event for full details including attendees and description.' However, it does not explicitly address when not to use it versus search_events, a closely related sibling, so it misses full when-not guidance.

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