get-calendars

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It correctly indicates the tool is read-only and returns metadata, but does not disclose potential rate limits, authentication requirements, or behavior when no calendars exist. The transparency is adequate but not enriched beyond the basic functionality.

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?

Two concise sentences with the core purpose front-loaded. Every word adds value; no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 no output schema, the description adequately specifies the type of data returned (metadata). It does not explicitly mention the response structure (list of objects) but for a straightforward list tool, this is reasonably complete. A mention of the return format would push it to 5.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. It correctly implies the tool takes no arguments.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'calendars', and specifies the returned metadata (colors, settings, sync status). It is distinct from sibling tools like get-events, get-tasks, which operate on different resources.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any specific context, prerequisites, or exclusions that would help an agent distinguish it from other list operations.

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