list_calendars

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not state that the operation is read-only, what the response format is, or any prerequisites beyond 'enabled accounts'. The description is too thin to convey meaningful non-obvious behavior.

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 a single, focused sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional param, no output schema), so the description is adequate to convey its basic function. However, it does not mention what the returned list contains (e.g., calendar names, IDs), which could matter for chaining calls. Given the lack of output schema, a bit more context would be helpful.

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% for the single optional parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats the parameter's purpose ('one or all enabled accounts') but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), names the resource ('Google Calendars'), and clarifies the scope ('for one or all enabled accounts'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list_accounts or list_drive_files.

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 implies usage by stating you can list calendars for one or all accounts, but it doesn't explicitly mention when to use it (e.g., before get_event) or provide alternative tool guidance. Context is minimal but clearly not misleading.

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