ghl_calendar_event_list

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds the endpoint and OAuth scopes, but does not elaborate on behavioral aspects like pagination, ordering, or error handling. With annotations covering the core safety profile, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 concise (three lines) and front-loaded with the purpose. However, it lacks important usage details that could be included concisely, making it under-informative. It earns its space but could be improved.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the response format, pagination, or what fields are returned. Annotations exist but the description should compensate for the missing output schema. It fails to provide sufficient context for an agent.

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 the schema already describes all parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states 'Get Calendar Events', which combined with the title in annotations, indicates listing calendar events. It is distinct from sibling tools like calendar_list or event_schedule_create, but does not explicitly differentiate. The endpoint and OAuth scopes reinforce the purpose.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool over alternatives, prerequisites (e.g., need a locationId), or any context for selecting this tool among calendar-related siblings.

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