gcalendar_events_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that baseline - no error behavior for missing/invalid event IDs, no note on what fields are returned, no indication that a nonexistent event produces a failed lookup.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler, appropriately sized for a simple get-by-ID operation. Brevity edges toward under-specification, but the sentence itself is efficient and earns its place.

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 read-only retrieval tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate - an agent can call it given calendarId and eventId. It nonetheless omits any differentiation from sibling tools and any note about lookup failure, leaving a small but real gap.

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 100%, and all four parameters (calendarId, eventId, timeZone, maxAttendees) are documented directly in the schema. The description adds no parameter detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (Get) and resource (event) with retrieval scope ('one event by its ID'), which implicitly distinguishes it from the listing sibling gcalendar_events_list. However, it never explicitly names or contrasts with that sibling, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as gcalendar_events_list for listing or gcalendar_events_quick_add for creation. Usage is only weakly implied by the need for an event ID.

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