export-to-calendar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the export action and compatible calendars, but omits details such as whether the file is downloaded, if any modifications occur, or authentication requirements. This is minimal beyond the basic action.

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 with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 3 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. It does not explain the output format (e.g., that it returns a downloadable .ics file) or provide details on file handling, which would enhance completeness.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what is already in the schema. The schema descriptions are self-sufficient.

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 verb 'Exporteer' and the resource 'deadlines als .ics kalenderbestand', specifying compatible calendars (Google, Apple, Outlook). It distinguishes from sibling get-tools that display data inline, as this is an export action.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get-course-calendar' or 'get-upcoming-deadlines'. It lacks context on prerequisites or scenarios where export is appropriate.

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