list_calendar_eventsFetch calendar events and assignments for specific courses between two dates, enabling you to track upcoming deadlines and scheduled class activities.
List calendar events/assignments in a date range across given course context codes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| type | No | ||
| end_date | Yes | ISO date, e.g. 2026-09-30 | |
| course_ids | Yes | ||
| start_date | Yes | ISO date, e.g. 2026-09-01 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only list operation, but does not disclose return format, pagination, permissions, or whether the optional type parameter filters events versus assignments.
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?
It is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, clearly stating the operation and its primary scope.
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 4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and 50% schema coverage, the description is too thin. It omits the type parameter, return behavior, and any filtering or pagination details needed for correct invocation.
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 description coverage is only 50%. The description adds meaning for the date range and course context codes, but it does not explain the optional 'type' parameter or its enum values, leaving a significant gap for parameter usage.
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 'List' and resource 'calendar events/assignments', plus scope (date range, course context codes). It is clear but does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like list_upcoming_events or list_assignments.
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 date range and course context codes imply when to use it, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over list_upcoming_events or list_assignments, and no exclusions or alternatives named.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.