calendar_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and discloses several non-obvious traits: all calendars including hidden ones are searched, results are newest first, and recurring events use the first occurrence's start/end. It does not describe return structure, permissions, or rate limits, but the key search semantics are covered.

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 two short paragraphs, front-loads the core purpose, and every sentence adds useful scope or behavioral context. There is no repetition or filler.

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 six-parameter search tool with no output schema, it covers the critical invocation semantics: series versus occurrences, all-calendar scope, result ordering, and recurrence handling. It does not explain the shape of returned results, but enough is present to call the 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that the query searches title, description, and location, and by explaining how start/end behave for recurring event series. It reinforces that the calendar parameter can cover hidden calendars too.

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 verb and resource: search event series by text in title, description, or location. It immediately distinguishes series from occurrences and names calendar.events for concrete occurrences, so an agent can tell it apart from calendar_events without inspecting either schema.

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?

It explicitly says to use calendar.events with `query` when the agent needs concrete occurrences in a range, which is a clear alternative-selection rule. It also specifies that the search covers all calendars including hidden ones, giving enough context to choose this tool over calendar-specific listing tools.

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