Search Microsoft 365 Calendar

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the required roles, which is useful behavioral context, and implies read-only search behavior. However, it does not detail pagination behavior, result ordering, or error handling, leaving transparency gaps.

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 concise, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes essential permission information. The Chinese intents add minor redundancy but serve a useful purpose for multilingual users, so it remains efficient without being overly verbose.

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 search tool with three well-documented parameters, the description provides the core purpose, query syntax, and required permissions. It does not explain return format, but the absence of an output schema makes this less critical. It is reasonably complete for the tool's complexity.

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 100%, with all parameters (query, from, size) already documented in the schema. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond restating the Microsoft Search query syntax, which is already in the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 searches calendar events using Microsoft Search query syntax, providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like calendar_list_events or search_mail, so it falls short of the highest rating.

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 mentions required roles (mcp.search and mcp.calendar) but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as calendar_list_events or other domain-specific search tools. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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