gws.cal.list_events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the time-range scoping but does not disclose additional behaviors like pagination, default calendar, or that it accepts search queries (q). Since annotations cover safety profile, this is acceptable but not rich.

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 sentence with no filler or redundant information. It is front-loaded and immediately conveys the core function.

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?

With 6 parameters fully described in the schema and annotations indicating a safe read operation, the description is adequate for an agent to understand the tool's core purpose. It does not explain return values, but no output schema exists; however, the schema and annotations compensate for most gaps. A slightly more detailed description with alternative tool references would push this to 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 100%, with each parameter having a clear description. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it simply restates the time-range requirement. Baseline for high schema coverage is 3, which 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 'List calendar events within a time range' clearly specifies the verb (List), the resource (calendar events), and the scope (within a time range). It distinguishes from sibling tools like gws.cal.get_event (single event), gws.cal.create_event (create), and gws.cal.list_calendars (different resource).

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. There is no mention of using gws.cal.get_event for a single event or how this differs from listing calendars. The only implied usage is that it lists events over a time range, but no exclusions or alternative references are given.

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