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

Beyond annotations, the description adds critical behavioral details: the action is irreversible, it cascades to delete all appointments, and full scope is required. This goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation and provides meaningful side-effect context.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then scope and irreversibility. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter delete operation, the description covers what is deleted, the cascade behavior, irreversibility, and a scope requirement. Annotations provide the destructive hint, and no output schema is expected, so the description is complete.

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 input schema already describes calendarId with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' and clearly identifies the resource 'calendar' plus the added scope 'and all its appointments'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_calendar_override or delete_calendar_reminder.

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 clearly indicates when to use this tool (to delete a calendar and its appointments). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the 'Requires full scope' note provides a clear prerequisite. Lacks explicit when-not guidance compared to a top-tier example.

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