get_calendar_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'advanced options' but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination, error handling, or what 'advanced' means operationally. The description is too vague to inform the agent about how the tool behaves 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, efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the core action. However, 'advanced options' is ambiguous and doesn't earn its place by adding clear value, slightly reducing conciseness. Overall, it's brief but could be more precise.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to compensate for the lack of structured data by not explaining return values, error conditions, or the meaning of 'advanced options'. For a tool with multiple parameters and no output schema, this leaves significant gaps in understanding.

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%, providing detailed descriptions for all 4 parameters including enums and defaults. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, as 'advanced options' is too vague to map to specific parameters. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the tool 'Get calendar events with advanced options' which provides a basic verb+resource combination ('Get calendar events'), but lacks specificity about what 'advanced options' entails. It distinguishes from obvious non-calendar siblings but doesn't clearly differentiate from potential calendar-related tools like 'get_schedule' or 'test_calendar_endpoints'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions 'advanced options' but doesn't specify what makes it advanced compared to other tools like 'get_schedule' or when to prefer one over the other. There's no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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