calendar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only lists operations without explaining side effects, output formats, or operation-specific behavior such as what 'events' does or what happens with invalid dates. The first-class Persian/Jalali note adds some context but not enough.

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 short, front-loaded, and free of filler. It enumerates core operations efficiently, though the 'events' operation is omitted entirely.

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 tool has six operations, six parameters, an enum-heavy schema, and no output schema, yet the description does not explain operation-specific parameter requirements or return behavior. An agent cannot reliably know that 'convert' needs target_calendar, that month_info needs year and month, or what 'events' expects, so the description is incomplete.

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 description adds minor context about calendar systems and month-related operations, but it does not meaningfully clarify parameter combinations, defaults, or format expectations beyond the schema.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: calendar system operations including converting between calendar types, validating dates, computing weekdays, and generating month calendars. It names specific functionality and resources, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the overlapping sibling 'jalali_persian'.

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 like convert_time or jalali_persian. The description never states exclusions, preferred scenarios, or when a sibling would be more appropriate.

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