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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is carried; the description adds valuable behavior beyond that: the 'WRITE:' marker, the fact that it returns the new event's id, and the attendee-restriction constraint. It does not cover failure modes or permission requirements, keeping it below 5.

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 compact, front-loaded block: write marker, action, required inputs, constraints, return value, API mapping. Every sentence carries information and nothing is padded.

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 9-parameter write tool with no output schema, the description still tells the agent what is required, where to source the type id, how to attach relations, and that an id is returned. Only edge cases like timezone handling or validation failures are unaddressed.

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?

With 67% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining that activity_type_id comes from a companion list tool, that attendees are firm users only, and that links target customers or deals rather than free-text. That adds real meaning for the loosely documented optional fields.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('put a meeting or call on the Teamleader calendar') and is clearly distinct from teamleader_list_events and the other create_* siblings. An agent can identify the operation immediately.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to teamleader_list_activity_types for the required activity_type_id, and states that attendees must be firm users while customers/deals go in links. It gives clear context but does not state an explicit when-not-to-use condition.

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