List calendars

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the read-only and side-effect-free nature of the tool. The description adds the purpose of finding a calendarId, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, or error behavior. Since the safety profile is covered by annotations, a 3 is appropriate—it adds some contextual value but not rich behavioral detail.

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 concise sentences with zero waste. The primary action is front-loaded, and the second sentence provides clear, actionable guidance. Every word earns its place.

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 simple list operation with a single optional parameter, the description covers the essential use case and purpose. Annotations cover the read-only and open-world aspects. It does not mention return format or pagination, but these are reasonable implicit expectations for a list tool. The description is adequately complete for an agent to use it 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?

The only parameter, locationId, is fully described in the schema with its purpose and default value. With 100% schema description coverage, the description does not need to add further explanation. The tool description does not add any extra semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is correct.

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 ('List'), a specific resource ('calendars'), and a clear scope ('for a location'). It also explicitly mentions the intended use case of finding a calendarId for booking and availability lookups, which distinguishes it from related sibling tools like ghl_get_calendar_events or ghl_block_calendar_slot.

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 provides a clear 'when to use' instruction: 'Use this to find a calendarId for booking and availability lookups.' It implies the tool is a prerequisite step for booking/availability, which guides the agent. However, it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it, though the naming convention among siblings suggests the distinction is clear.

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