list_calendar_events

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states that it lists events and hints at another mode ('or reads O...'), but fails to mention side effects, permission requirements, rate limits, or handling of recurring events. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 extremely brief but truncated mid-sentence ('or reads O...'), making it structurally incomplete. While short, the abrupt cutoff violates clear structure and leaves a dangling thought.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain return format, how the date range is provided, permission prerequisites, or what the alternative reading mode entails. The sibling list shows many similar calendar tools, so more differentiation is needed.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds the concept of a date range, but this is not represented in the schema, creating ambiguity about how the range is specified. This inconsistency reduces the helpfulness of the added semantic information.

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 the tool 'lists events from the Mac's Calendar app' with specific scope (local/iCloud calendars) and a date range filter. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create/update/delete_calendar_event and m365_list_events. Although truncated, the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 phrase 'in a date range' implies a usage context, and specifying 'Mac's Calendar app' differentiates from Microsoft 365 calendar tools. However, no explicit alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, so guidance is contextual rather than direct.

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