calendar_feed_get

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses the exact success response shape and the distinct disabled-state response shape. It also clearly warns that the URL is a credential granting deadline access and should only be shown to the user.

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 front-loaded with the resource and efficiently enumerates return fields despite the lack of an output schema. The security warning earns its place, though the long field list makes it dense rather than elegant.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema, and simple read-only annotations, the description supplies the missing return-value information and the off-state shape. It also covers the key security caveat, leaving no important behavioral gap for an agent to call this 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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. Per the calibration rule for 0 params, the baseline is 4.

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 identifies the specific resource: the user's calendar subscription in the current organization. It does not explicitly say "get" or name sibling tools such as calendar_feed_enable/update/disable, but the returned fields make the retrieval purpose clear.

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?

Usage is implied: read the current subscription and its feed URLs. The only explicit guidance is security-oriented ("show it only to the user"), with no when-to-use comparison against calendar_feed_enable, calendar_feed_update, or calendar_feed_disable.

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