calendar_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the semantic/embedding mechanism, which is genuine behavioral context beyond the schema, but says nothing about permissions, read-only nature, performance characteristics, or result semantics for a tool that returns AI-ranked matches.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with the core purpose first and capability notes after. Minor redundancy between 'semantic search... using AI embeddings' and 'finds events by meaning', but nothing is bloated.

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 7-parameter search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It omits how results are returned or ranked, whether the search spans all calendars by default, and any coverage of the date-window parameters that meaningfully shape results.

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 schema already documents all seven parameters including examples, defaults, and enum values. The description's mention of calendar name and all-day filtering merely restates a subset of what the schema provides, adding no syntax or behavioral detail.

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+resource combination ('Semantic search for calendar events') and clarifies the mechanism ('using AI embeddings', 'finds events by meaning'). This distinguishes it from keyword/date siblings like calendar_date and calendar_upcoming, though it never names those alternatives explicitly.

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 implies when to use it ('by meaning' rather than by date), but never states explicit conditions, exclusions, or which sibling to prefer for date-based lookups (calendar_date, calendar_upcoming, calendar_week). Usage is inferable rather than spelled out.

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