unlock_get_calendar

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It adds the key behavioral trait that the calendar spans all projects and respects a date range, but does not explain output format, pagination, or permissions. As a read operation implied by 'Get', this is adequate but incomplete.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally viable. It clearly states purpose and scope, but lacks additional context such as what an unlock event contains or whether all projects means user-accessible projects. Enough for a basic fetch, but not rich.

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?

The schema already documents both parameters (startDate, endDate) with ISO format descriptions, so coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the date-range context, which is already clear from 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 states the verb ('Get'), the resource ('unlock events calendar'), and the scope ('for a date range across all projects'). It distinguishes from siblings like unlock_get_upcoming by specifying a date range rather than upcoming events.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as unlock_get_upcoming, unlock_tracker_stats, or unlock_list_projects. The description gives context (date range, across all projects) but does not mention exclusions or when to choose this over sibling tools.

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