Get Calendar Resource

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to re-state safety. It adds valuable invocation context beyond those annotations: HTTP GET, the path structure, token location, and required OAuth scope.

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 compact and front-loads the actionable detail in one sentence, then provides auth requirements. The opening phrase 'Get Calendar Resource' is a redundant restatement of the title, which prevents a 5.

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 two-parameter read-only getter, this is complete: the schema documents all inputs, the endpoint defines the resource, and token and scopes cover authorization. An output schema is not necessary to make the call correctly, and annotations already cover safety behavior.

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 coverage is 100%, and both parameters have descriptions, with resourceType further constrained by an enum. The description's endpoint template reinforces the parameter roles but adds no semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific operation, 'Get calendar resource by ID', and gives the exact endpoint [GET /calendars/resources/{resourceType}/{id}]. This clearly separates it from nearby getters like calendars_get_calendar_events or calendars_get_appointment.

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 makes it obvious this tool is for retrieving a single calendar resource by resourceType and id, and the endpoint, token, and scopes define the call context. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or say when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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