Get Calendar Events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which fully cover the safety profile. The description adds the location scoping constraint but does not disclose other behavioral aspects like pagination, response shape, or potential rate limits. With strong annotations, the additional value is moderate.

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, concise sentence of about 12 words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, contains no filler, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 the strong annotations, descriptive schema, and moderate complexity (6 optional parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential purpose and constraints. It does not describe pagination or the return structure, but for a simple read-only list operation, the provided information is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool.

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 83%, with only locationId lacking a description. The description mentions calendar, contact, and date range, which map to the existing schema parameters, but does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Since coverage is high, the description's marginal value is limited.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource 'appointments/events' and scopes it to 'for a location'. It also lists optional filters (calendar, contact, date range), making the purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like ghl_create_event or ghl_get_calendar.

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?

The description provides clear context by specifying that it retrieves events and lists the available filter dimensions. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool (e.g., for calendar availability use ghl_get_free_slots), so it stops short of explicit exclusions.

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