List Calendar Event Attachments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. The phrase 'attachment metadata' explicitly indicates that actual file content is not retrieved, and 'List' implies a non-destructive read operation. While it omits details like auth requirements or error behavior, this is a reasonable disclosure for a read-only list tool.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the purpose. The additional Chinese intents are helpful for multilingual contexts but are somewhat redundant; still, the overall structure is tight and efficient.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the action and output type ('attachment metadata'). It does not detail the metadata fields, but given the low complexity, this is sufficient.

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 100% with a single 'eventId' parameter described as 'Event ID'. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond aligning the parameter with 'calendar event', so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'attachment metadata for a calendar event'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mail_list_attachments and calendar_add/delete_attachment, making the purpose 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?

Usage context is implied: the tool is used when one wants to see attachment metadata for a calendar event. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions, relying on the reader to infer from the sibling tool list.

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