finnhub_calendar_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only mentions JSON export for large datasets, but does not disclose rate limits, operation-specific behaviors, or whether operations share state. This is insufficient for a tool with multiple sub-actions.

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 concise with two sentences plus a list of operations. It front-loads the main purpose. The only minor flaw is a double period after 'datasets', but overall it is efficient and structured.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the operation enum but under-explains other parameters' usage and dependencies. It provides a broad overview but is not fully complete for an agent to use all parameters correctly.

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 high (83%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by listing the operation options and mentioning JSON export, but does not explain the interplay of parameters like 'to' and 'from' across operations, nor does it clarify the 'project' parameter further.

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 accesses IPO, earnings, economic, and FDA calendars, listing the specific operations. It is specific about the resource and verb, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like finnhub_market_events or others, though the distinct domain is implied.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The description lacks context about prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent with no help in selecting this tool over siblings.

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