delete-my-calendar-permission

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the bar is lower. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it states that this revokes share/delegate access, that non-removable permissions (e.g., implicit 'My Organization') will cause a Graph error, and that the permission id comes from list-my-calendar-permissions. No contradiction with annotations.

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 tightly written sentences with zero fluff. The core action is front-loaded, followed by the practical tip and error condition. The emoji and line break aid readability without wasting space. Every sentence 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 destructive delete tool with no output schema, the description covers all needed operational details: how to obtain the required id, likely error conditions, and the exact scope ('my'). Annotations cover the destructive nature, and the schema covers parameters. Nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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 100% with descriptions for all params, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning: the tip to fetch the permission id from list-my-calendar-permissions and the note about isRemovable=false affecting deletion. This provides context beyond the schema's param descriptions, justifying a 4.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('Delete my calendar permission') and clarifies the action as revoking calendar share or delegate access. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list/create/update-my-calendar-permission by being the delete operation, so an agent can easily identify it.

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?

Provides actionable usage guidance: tells the agent to get the permission id via list-my-calendar-permissions and warns about non-removable permissions (isRemovable=false) that will cause an error. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives but clearly implies this is for deletion, and the 'when not to use' (non-removable) is covered.

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