feishu_get_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the bare action. It does not state whether authentication or calendar access permissions are required, what happens when the event or calendar ID is invalid, or what the response contains.

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 short sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded; nothing is padded. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity leaves content gaps that conciseness alone cannot justify.

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 two-parameter read tool with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient to select and invoke it correctly. However, with no annotations and no return-value guidance, an agent gets no hint about permissions or failure behavior.

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%, with event_id and calendar_id both documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no additional semantic detail (e.g., ID formats or where to obtain them) beyond what the schema already supplies.

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?

States a specific verb (获取) and resource (飞书日程详情), which is clearly a read of a single event. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling feishu_get_event_list, so the agent must infer the singular-vs-list distinction from the name alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as feishu_get_event_list or feishu_get_free_busy. The agent must infer usage purely from the tool name and required IDs.

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