calendars_create_appointment_note

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

Annotations indicate a non-read-only operation and no destructive intent, but the description adds no behavioral context. It does not disclose what happens on creation, any side effects, permission requirements, or the returned value. With annotations present, the bar is lower, but the description provides zero additional transparency beyond the 'create' implication.

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 words is concise but not appropriately sized; it under-specifies the tool. There is no structure, no meaningful content, and no front-loaded information. The description is effectively a tautology that restates the verb and object without adding value.

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 write operation with three parameters and no output schema, this description is completely inadequate. It provides no context about preconditions, related entities, error scenarios, or expected results, leaving an agent unable to call the tool with confidence.

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 does not explain any parameters. The schema itself describes 'body' and 'appointmentId' briefly, but 'userId' has no description. Since schema coverage is 67% (not >80%), the description should compensate but does not, offering no clarification of parameter meaning, format, or optionality.

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 'Create Note' states a verb and a generic resource but omits the appointment context entirely. It fails to distinguish this tool from sibling tools like calendars_delete_appointment_note or contacts_create_note, and an agent cannot tell what kind of note this creates without inspecting the name or 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., calendars_update_appointment_note or contacts_create_note). No context, exclusions, or prerequisites are provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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