Get Event

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that search_events returns the same full data for each match, implying get_event returns similar data. It clearly indicates a read-only operation via 'Retrieve.' It does not mention error handling or permissions, but for a simple get operation this is acceptable.

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 highly concise, with three short sentences: the main purpose, a usage condition, and a note about search_events. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, read-only retrieval), the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, when to use it, and its relationship to the search alternative. No significant gaps exist.

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 100%, with the event_id parameter already described as 'The EventId to retrieve.' The description adds negligible semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: 'Retrieve a single calendar event by ID.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from search_events by noting the same data is returned via search. This makes the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Use this when you already have an EventId and need the record.' It also explicitly warns not to use it when you don't have the ID, pointing to search_events as the alternative. This fully addresses when and when not to use the tool.

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