get_event_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses caching behavior ('Events are cached from previous...calls') and lazy loading of attendees ('Attendees are fetched lazily on first request and cached for the session'). It also lists returned fields. It does not mention rate limits or permissions, but for a read-only getter that 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 three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the core function, listing return fields, and explaining caching behavior. There is no redundant information, and the purpose 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 complexity (1 param, no nested objects, has output schema), the description covers the essential aspects: what it gets, what fields are returned, and how data is sourced (cached from previous calls, lazy loading). This is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

The only parameter is 'event_id', which is a required string. The schema coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It does so by clarifying the ID must come from a cached event ('cached event by ID'), implying it is obtained from previous list/search calls. This adds context beyond the raw schema.

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 starts with a clear verb+resource pair: 'Get full details of a cached event by ID.' It explicitly states the action (get) and the specific entity (cached event details by ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_events, list_calendars, and search_events, which have different scopes.

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 explains that 'Events are cached from previous list_events/search_events calls,' providing clear context on when to use this tool (after listing/searching). It implies the event ID must come from those calls. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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