Calendar Change Alert

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the description's mention of 'fetches' is consistent. It adds no new behavioral context beyond annotations, meeting the baseline expectation without contradiction.

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 a single sentence that conveys the core action without any extra words. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 tool with no parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description adequately explains its purpose. However, it could be more explicit about the trigger condition (e.g., what 'calendar is modified' means) to fully cover expected behavior. Overall, it is sufficient for its simplicity.

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 has zero parameters, so no additional parameter documentation is needed. The description correctly implies no inputs are required, earning a baseline score of 4 as per the rules for zero-parameter tools.

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 tool automatically fetches today's events triggered by calendar modification. The name 'alert' aligns with this. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_upcoming_events' or 'today_events' which also retrieve events, missing a chance to clarify its unique role as an automatic trigger.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't explain that this is for alert-triggered retrieval rather than manual querying, leaving the agent to guess appropriate usage context.

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