List Events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two genuinely useful facts beyond the annotations: that pagination uses bounded opaque page_tokens and that the scheduled_events:read scope is required. However, 'bounded opaque page_token retrieval' is vague and the return shape is not characterized.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and then the scope requirement. Efficient and no filler, though the first sentence is nearly contentless.

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 13 optional parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the auth scope and pagination mode but says nothing about the default sort/count behavior or what a caller receives. It is minimally adequate given the fully documented schema, but thin for a 13-parameter listing tool.

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% across all 13 parameters, so the schema already carries full parameter meaning. The description adds nothing about filtering semantics, defaults, or interactions between user/group/organization/invitee_email filters, so baseline 3 applies.

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 'List Events', which essentially restates the name and title, and adds only the generic 'Reads Calendly data'. There is no differentiation from close siblings such as get_event or list_event_invitees, so an agent gets a vague sense of the resource but no distinguishing scope.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_event, list_event_invitees, or the many other list_* siblings. No prerequisites, exclusions, or selection criteria are given.

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