Remove an event and all associated actions from your schedule. Use this operation when an event is no longer needed, cleaning up related tasks in a single step.
Delete an event and all its associated actions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| event_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It clearly reveals the cascading deletion of associated actions, which is a key side effect beyond the bare operation. It does not mention irreversibility or permissions, but the destructive nature plus the cascade is well covered.
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?
A single compact sentence front-loads the action and resource, then appends the important cascade side effect. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.
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?
The essential operation and key side effect are stated, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description omits what the call returns and does not clarify irreversibility or permissions. This is adequate for a simple delete tool but leaves notable gaps for an agent making an autonomous call.
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 only parameter, event_id, is minimally described in the schema as a required string. The description adds no parameter-level explanation, format, or constraints. With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not compensate beyond what the property name implies.
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?
Description uses a specific verb 'Delete' with the resource 'event' and explicitly adds the side effect 'all its associated actions,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_action. There is no ambiguity about what operation is performed.
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?
No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, and no alternatives are mentioned. The sibling tools suggest related operations (e.g., delete_action for action-only deletion), but the description does not route the agent to them, leaving usage context entirely implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.