get_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return contents ('same fields as list_events plus its calendar, repeat rule and alerts'), which is helpful, and the cross-calendar fallback behavior. However, it doesn't state what happens on not-found, permission needs, or whether the calendar is required to disambiguate duplicate uids.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by parameter behavior and return values. No filler.

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?

For a 2-param, no-output-schema read tool with no annotations, the description covers purpose, both parameters, and return shape. Missing edge-case behavior (not-found, duplicate uids across calendars) keeps it from a 5.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It meaningfully explains uid ('the id every event tool returns') and calendar (optional, omit to search all), adding semantics beyond the bare schema types. It could add format details (string id format) but covers both parameters adequately.

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 and resource ('get one event's full details') and clarifies the key parameter's origin (the uid every event tool returns). Clear enough to distinguish from list_events, search_events, and read_note.

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?

Explains the calendar parameter's behavior: leave it out to search all calendars. It clarifies the retrieval context well, but doesn't explicitly contrast against list_events or search_events for when this is preferable (e.g., when you already have the uid).

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