get_event

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses read-only side effects and error condition (id not found). It does not cover permissions or rate limits, but for a simple read operation, these are less critical. The disclosure is adequate and adds value 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 description is concise (two sentences plus example) with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose, then provides an illustrative example, and ends with behavioral notes. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description includes a detailed example of the return object listing all fields. It also covers the error condition. For a single-parameter get tool, this provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke and interpret the response.

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 has 100% coverage of parameter description, so baseline is 3. The description adds an example showing the parameter in context and the return shape, which enriches understanding beyond the schema's description of the id field.

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 'Fetch the full details of a single calendar event by ID', specifying the action and resource. It lists included fields (description, all-day flag, tags) and distinguishes from siblings like list_events (multiple events) and other get tools.

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 implies usage when a single event's full details are needed by ID. It does not explicitly exclude other scenarios, but the context of siblings (list_events for multiple, other get tools) makes the usage context clear.

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