create_calendar_event

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

With no annotations, the description discloses behavioral traits: requires scope and writer/owner permission, creates an event, and optionally notifies attendees. It also explains time format choices. Lacks details on errors or side effects beyond creation.

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?

Front-loaded with action and version. Important preconditions are placed early. Every sentence adds value: scope, permission, time fields. No fluff.

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?

Given 12 parameters (4 required), nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers time fields and preconditions but omits return value (e.g., created event object), error behavior, or pagination. Slightly incomplete for full agent autonomy.

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%, providing baseline of 3. The description adds value by explaining time format in detail (two forms), scope/permission requirements, and the need_notification default. This moves beyond schema repetition.

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 starts with 'Create a new calendar event' clearly stating the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get/update/delete/list by focusing on creation.

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 specifies required scope and permission, guiding when the tool can be used. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives (e.g., respond_calendar_event).

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