list_calendly_invitees

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention anything about authentication, rate limits, pagination, or the nature of the data returned. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic listing operation.

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 a single sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It is appropriate for a simple list operation but does not use front-loading or clear formatting to aid scanning.

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 the tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is very incomplete. It does not explain what an invitee is, what fields are returned, any prerequisites like having an event UUID, or how to interpret the response. A more complete description is needed for effective tool selection and use.

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 50% (2 of 4 parameters have descriptions), but the tool description adds no additional meaning to the parameters. It does not explain what 'status' values are allowed (though schema says 'active or canceled') or what 'count' and 'api_key' are for. The description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameters.

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 action (list) and resource (invitees for a Calendly scheduled event), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_calendly_event, list_calendly_events, and list_calendly_event_types. The verb+resource combination is specific and 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention requiring the event UUID (although it's in the schema), nor does it differentiate from listing all events or getting an event. There is no indication of prerequisites or appropriate context.

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