list-calendar-events

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful non-obvious behavior: this tool returns series masters and single events rather than expanded recurrences, and it is limited to the default calendar. It does not describe return shape, but the schema covers pagination semantics.

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 exactly two sentences with no filler. The core functionality is front-loaded, and the routing guidance is expressed in one compact clause.

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?

The description plus fully documented schema provides enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly: scope, recurrence behavior, and the key alternative are all covered. A small gap is the lack of any explicit statement about the response format, though the pagination-related parameters imply list semantics.

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?

All 5 parameters have detailed descriptions in the schema, so schema coverage is 100% and the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, but none is needed because the schema already documents cursor, filter, select, orderby, and maxItems clearly.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List events of the default calendar', and further clarifies the scope with '(series masters + single events)'. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get-calendar-view by noting that the sibling expands recurrences.

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 explicitly tells agents when to prefer an alternative: 'For time-ranged queries prefer get-calendar-view which expands recurrences.' This gives a clear when-not-to-use signal and names the relevant sibling tool.

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