get_calendar_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and covers it well: it reveals the ICS export source, the exact JSON array shape with event fields, and the empty-result scenario. It even explains why results may be empty and how to recover, going well 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 main purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by a valuable fallback note and a minimal args line. Every sentence earns its place; no filler or repeated schema noise.

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 a single integer argument, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is unusually complete: it documents the return payload, covers the foreseeable no-events case, and names the two alternate tools to pursue. Nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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 only parameter is school_id, and the description's 'Args: school_id: School ID' merely restates the schema's property title and type. With schema_description_coverage at 0%, the description should compensate, but it adds no guidance about where to obtain the ID, format constraints, or validation.

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?

Description opens with 'Get calendar events for a school using the ICS calendar export', naming a specific verb, resource, and data source. It also distinguishes itself from feed/post tools by explaining when calendar data appears as images/PDFs instead.

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 gives explicit routing: if get_calendar_events returns no events, use get_feeds to look for posts with 'calendar' in the title or image/PDF attachments, then get_post to view them. This is exactly the when-to-use and alternative selection guidance an agent needs.

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