Mariana Google MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to specify critical details: the return format (boolean availability vs. time blocks), whether the operation is read-only, or how multi-calendar queries behave. It mentions 'free/busy' but doesn't explain what data structure is returned.

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 consists of a single, efficient sentence with no redundant words or filler. It is front-loaded with the action verb ('Check') and immediately specifies the target resource and scope, demonstrating optimal information density for its length.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It fails to describe the return value format (essential for a query tool without output schema documentation) and omits behavioral context such as default calendar selection behavior or multi-account handling.

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 schema has 100% description coverage, establishing a baseline of 3. The description loosely references 'date or date range' which maps to date_start and date_end, but adds no additional semantic context for 'calendar_id' or 'account' parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 core function ('Check free/busy status') and scope ('for a date or date range'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like calendar_create or calendar_update. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from calendar_get or calendar_search, which might also query date ranges but return full event details rather than availability status.

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 description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use availability check vs. searching events), nor does it mention prerequisites like authentication requirements or necessary permissions despite the presence of an 'account' parameter.

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