get-calendar-view

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context: it expands recurring occurrences, requires a time range, and enumerates returned fields including onlineMeeting join URL and recurrence. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, the requirement is stated, and the return payload summary 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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of describing return values, which it does by listing organizer, participants, start/end, location, join URL, and recurrence. Pagination and filtering are left to the schema, which fully documents them, so nothing critical 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a meaningful constraint not captured by the schema's optional fields: 'Requires timeRange or from/to.' It also indicates which fields are important in the response, aiding parameter selection.

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 states a specific verb+resource: 'list all calendar events' within a time range, and positions itself as the 'PRIMARY meeting-lookup tool.' It also calls out recurring occurrences, which distinguishes it from event-specific siblings like get-calendar-event or list-calendar-events.

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?

Clear context is given: use as the primary meeting lookup tool and provide timeRange or from/to. It does not explicitly contrast with list-calendar-events or get-calendar-event, but the 'PRIMARY' framing and requirement statement provide adequate routing guidance.

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