outlook_find_event_by_key

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the bar is lower. The description adds valuable behavior: searches the default calendar or a specified one, covers any date, and returns events and series masters (not occurrences). This clarifies return semantics beyond annotations. Lacks details like handling multiple matches or pagination, so not a 5.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds useful information: key origin, date scope, calendar behavior, and return type. No wasted words.

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 2 parameters, one required, no output schema, and read-only annotations, the description covers what the tool does, when to use it, what it searches, and what it returns. It omits error handling or behavior when multiple events share a key, which is a minor gap.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that `key` comes from create/update and that `calendar` defaults to the default calendar. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the bare string types, though it doesn't specify key format or calendar syntax.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Find events by the `key`') and adds scope details ('Any date', 'Returns events and series masters, not occurrences'). It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like outlook_get_event, but the key-based lookup is clear enough to distinguish it from list/get tools.

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?

Provides clear context: use when you have a key from outlook_create_event or outlook_update_event. Implies no date filtering ('Any date') and mentions calendar scope. Does not state when to prefer other tools or any exclusions, keeping it at a 4 rather than 5.

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