get_event

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description's real contribution is the fallback rule — if no event is running it returns the nearest upcoming timed event and discloses that fact — which is behavior an agent could not infer from annotations or schema.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the returned fields and then the fallback caveat. No filler; only minor awkwardness in phrasing such as 'the body'.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, yet it still summarizes the payload. Its main gap is the absence of any pointer to list_events for date-range browsing, but for a three-parameter read tool this is otherwise complete.

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% and each parameter carries its own format note (YYYY-MM-DD, HH:MM, cache refresh), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description reinforces the semantics by stressing lookup 'at a time', matching the required time parameter, but adds no new format or constraint detail.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Details of the event at a time') and enumerates what is returned: location, organizer, attendees, status, body. It is clearly a single-event lookup rather than a listing, so an agent can separate it from list_events without opening either schema, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 is implied by 'at a time' — the tool is for pinpointing one event at a moment. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer it over list_events, nor any prerequisite guidance about needing a recent Outlook sync.

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