list_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains recurring-instance expansion, pagination via page_token and next_page_token, optional mailbox targeting, and the include_raw flag. It omits auth or error-behavior details, but the core behavior of a read-only list operation is transparent.

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 well-structured with a one-line summary, a behavioral note about calendarView, an Args list, and a Returns line. Every sentence carries useful information, and the most important scoping constraint is front-loaded.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description provides a complete operational contract: what the tool does, how parameters should be formatted, how pagination works, and what shape the return value takes. An agent has enough information to select and call this tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description compensates by enumerating and explaining all seven parameters: calendar_id discovery, required ISO 8601 start/end datetimes, limit range and default, page_token continuation, optional mailbox, and include_raw. It adds concrete format and constraint information well beyond the bare schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List events in a calendar within a date range.' It further clarifies behavior by noting that it uses Graph's calendarView and expands recurring events into instances, making it clearly distinct from siblings like get_event, list_calendars, and create_event.

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 gives clear context for when to call the tool and instructs the agent to use list_calendars to discover calendar_id. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives such as get_event for single-event lookups, but the date-range listing scope strongly implies the appropriate use case.

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