List upcoming events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' weakly implies a read-only operation, but nothing is said about ordering, the time horizon of 'upcoming', result caps, or what fields come back.

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?

A single efficient sentence that front-loads the resource. It is not padded, though it is arguably under-specified rather than maximally economical of information.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description should at minimum state the default window for 'upcoming' and the ordering of results. It specifies the content (events plus due dates) but leaves the temporal scope undefined.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no schema semantics to add and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly asserts this is a no-argument call by not implying any filters.

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 gives a clear verb+resource ('List ... upcoming Quercus events and assignment due dates') and scopes it to the current user. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like list_calendar_events or list_assignments, leaving overlap unresolved.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all. With siblings such as list_calendar_events and list_assignments available, an agent gets no signal about whether this is the aggregate/upcoming view or when to prefer those alternatives.

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