forward-calendar-event

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

Annotations already indicate a write/destructive operation. The description adds useful behavioral detail: it forwards the meeting request, notifies the organizer when forwarding from an attendee's mailbox, and adds the recipient to the organizer's copy. It also notes the Outlook.com limitation. 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?

The description is well-organized into a clear statement of action, side effects, and a tip. It's a bit redundant (the tip repeats some info) but remains readable and front-loaded with the main purpose.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the main operation, side effects, and body format. It doesn't mention the return value, but that may be less critical. It also doesn't mention permissions, which are implicit for calendar operations. Overall quite 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 description explicitly shows the body structure: '{ ToRecipients: [{ emailAddress: { address, name } }], Comment (optional) }', which complements the schema and clarifies that Comment is optional. With 80% schema coverage, this adds meaningful guidance beyond the schema for the key body parameter.

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 the action forwards a meeting event to a new recipient, using specific verbs 'forward' and resource 'meeting event'. It also explains side effects (notifying organizer, adding recipient), which helps distinguish it from email-forwarding tools like forward-mail-message.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (forwarding meeting requests) and notes an important limitation (not available for Outlook.com accounts). However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it beyond the account limitation.

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