search_events

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive nature. Description adds useful behavioral context: fast full-text matching via direct CalendarItem query and recurrence behavior, which goes beyond annotations.

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 sentences with no waste. First sentence states the core purpose, second adds performance hint, third provides recurrence handling and sibling redirection. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Covers purpose, usage guidance, and key behavioral trait (recurring event handling). No output schema, but return values are adequately implied. With rich siblings and annotations, the description is nearly complete.

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 high (80%), so baseline is 3. The description does not add significant new meaning for parameters beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., it restates the query field's scope).

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?

Clearly states the action (search), resource (Calendar.app events), and scope (text across title, description, location). Distinguishes from sibling list_events by noting that search_events returns master events for recurring ones.

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?

Explicitly advises to use list_events for occurrence-level detail when dealing with recurring events. Does not provide a full when-not-to-use guide, but the sibling mention suffices.

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