Calendar Search Events

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description correctly avoids repeating those. It adds useful behavioral context by stating that results are equivalent to calendar_list_events and that filtering can be bounded by an optional date range. No statement contradicts the annotations.

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 one focused sentence: action, target, optional scope, and an output-reference parenthetical. Every phrase earns its place and the main behavior is front-loaded.

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?

The rich input schema, output schema, and read-only/idempotence annotations cover the details a caller needs, and the description ties them together with the search and date-range semantics. The only gap is the absence of an explicit usage rule versus calendar_list_events, so it falls just short of fully self-contained.

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 explicit descriptions for query (case-insensitive match on summary, description, and location), start/end dates (YYYY-MM-DD or ISO datetime), and calendar_id. The description contributes no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline 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 names the operation ('Search'), the resource ('events'), and the distinguishing scope ('by text' within an optional date range). Referencing the same output as calendar_list_events further disambiguates it from the plain list sibling.

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 conveys that this tool is the text-search entry point for events, which is a clear use context. However, it never explicitly says when to choose it over calendar_list_events or when an unfiltered list is the better alternative; the 'same output' note only addresses return format, not selection.

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