get_calendly_event

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond the structured fields: no auth requirement (an api_key param exists), no error behavior for unknown UUIDs, no scope of returned detail. Adequate but thin for a tool with an undocumented credential parameter.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with zero padding. It is efficient, though the brevity reflects a lack of content rather than disciplined compression.

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 simple read-only lookup this covers the core purpose, and the annotations handle safety. Missing what an agent needs in practice: how api_key is supplied and whether detail includes invitee/cancellation info. No output schema exists, so some return-shape guidance would have been useful.

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 coverage is only 50% and the description supplies no parameter information at all. The undocumented api_key parameter is left completely unexplained in both schema and description, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get details of a single Calendly scheduled event'), which clearly distinguishes it from the list_* siblings by scope (single vs list). It does not name those siblings explicitly, so it falls short of the top score.

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 word 'single' implies this is the follow-up to list_calendly_events, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no mention that an event UUID must come from a listing first, and no alternatives named. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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