Delete Calendar Event

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, and the description still adds real value: irreversibility, the permission failure mode on course events, and the mandatory dry-run-then-confirm execution sequence. That is exactly the operational context an agent needs before a destructive irreversible call.

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 the action and its constraint, and the bracket convention makes the irreversible procedure visually scannable. Slight redundancy between 'Cannot be undone' and '[IRREVERSIBLE: ...]', though the bracket carries additional procedural detail rather than repeating itself.

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 mutation with no output schema, the description covers irreversibility, the permission boundary, and the confirmation workflow. It omits what the dry-run preview actually returns and whether related attendees/notifications are affected, which would fully close the loop.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, but the description reinforces the confirm semantics as a sequence ('call without confirm=true first to preview, then re-call with confirm=true'), clarifying that the preview and the execution are two separate invocations rather than a single call flag.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a calendar event you own') and immediately scopes it by ownership type ('such as a personal event'), which separates it from appointment/reservation cancellation and course-level events. An agent can identify the operation and its boundaries without opening the 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?

Gives a clear exclusion rule — course events return a permission error — plus the required two-step confirm protocol. It does not name an alternative tool for events the agent cannot delete (e.g., course events), but the when/when-not framing is explicit enough.

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