calendar_event_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the credential requirement and the CalDAV protocol, but does not indicate whether the operation is read-only, what the return format is, or how errors like 'not found' are handled. This is a significant gap for a get operation.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. It immediately states the action and resource, then adds the key prerequisite. Every word earns its place.

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 3-parameter get tool, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core purpose and a critical requirement, but lacks information about response format, error behavior, or any side effects. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, slightly more detail would improve completeness.

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% for all three parameters, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate, as the description does not compromise on parameter clarity but also does not enrich it.

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 verb ('Get') and the resource ('a specific calendar event'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like calendar_events_list, calendar_event_create, and calendar_event_delete. Mentioning 'for an alias (CalDAV)' adds useful context about the domain.

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 provides only a prerequisite ('Requires alias credentials') but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like calendar_events_list (when listing) or calendar_event_update (when modifying). It implies the need for an event_id but does not state it as a usage condition.

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