get_calendar_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that the tool 'Returns a list of events with their titles, times, and details', which is useful. However, it does not explicitly mention read-only behavior, permissions, timezone handling, or behavior for empty results, leaving some ambiguity for a tool with no annotation support.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear one-line purpose, a short bulleted list of example queries, and a one-sentence return summary. Every part earns its place and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 simple read-only tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete: it explains what the tool does, when to use it, and what it returns. It does not cover edge cases or timezone details, but these are not critical for the described functionality.

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%, so the input schema already fully documents the 'date' and 'dateEnd' parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond example queries, so it does not exceed the baseline.

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 opens with 'Get calendar events from Skylight', a specific verb+resource statement that clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like create_calendar_event, update_calendar_event, and delete_calendar_event. The example questions further reinforce that this is for reading/querying events, not managing them.

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 provides concrete usage examples ('What's on my calendar today?', 'What do we have scheduled this weekend?') which clearly indicate when to use this tool. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like get_source_calendars, but the examples sufficiently convey the intended use case.

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