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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), and the description adds a genuine behavioral trait beyond them: other fields on the note are preserved, i.e. this is a partial mutation. It still doesn't say what happens if the note is missing or the dates are invalid, so it falls short of full disclosure.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the scope constraint front-loaded ahead of the alternative-tool guidance. Every clause 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 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers purpose, partial-update semantics, and tool selection. The remaining gap is failure behavior (missing note, end_date before start_date) which the schema only hints at.

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 67%: start_date and end_date carry good descriptions including the ISO 8601 format and the single-day convention, and the description's 'new date range' framing matches them. calendar_note_id has no description anywhere, but its name is self-evident; this is the baseline for a partially documented schema.

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 (Moves) and resource (calendar note) plus the exact scope of change (to a new date range). It explicitly names the sibling it should be preferred over, so an agent can distinguish it from update_calendar_note without opening 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?

Gives an explicit routing rule: prefer this over update_calendar_note when only the dates change. That is a concrete when-to-use/when-to-use-alternative condition, not implied guidance.

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