calendar_next

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses two useful behavioral facts, inclusion of currently-running events and soonest-first ordering, but says nothing about what a returned occurrence contains, whether defaults for hidden/declined calendars apply silently, or any performance caveat (the schema mentions a slow unsynced path that the description ignores).

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?

A single sentence with no filler; the key qualifier (upcoming or currently running) and the ordering are both front-loaded. Nothing could be removed without losing signal.

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 7 optional parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the definition is minimally adequate. However, because no output schema documents the return shape, the description should say what an occurrence looks like and how the count cap behaves when days and count interact.

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%, so every parameter is already explained, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds only indirect signal: 'currently running' bears on the days window and 'soonest first' on count, but no syntax or default behavior is contributed beyond the 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 names a specific resource ('event occurrences'), a scope ('next upcoming or currently running'), and an ordering ('soonest first'), so an agent understands what comes back. It does not differentiate itself from siblings like calendar_events or calendar_search, which overlap heavily with this concept.

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 next upcoming (or currently running) event occurrences' implies the use case of a quick look-ahead, but the description never says when to prefer this over calendar_events, calendar_get, or calendar_search. With dozens of calendar siblings, the absence of any explicit contrast leaves the agent to infer routing.

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