manage_focus_time

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: auto-declines conflicting invitations, sets Chat to Do Not Disturb by default, lives on primary calendar only, and requires 'calendar.events' scope. This is good but lacks details on error handling or limits.

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 a single paragraph but concise, covering purpose, usage alternatives, behaviors, and scope. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. Slightly long but every sentence is informative.

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 16 parameters and high complexity, the description combined with the schema provides sufficient context for selection and invocation: what it does, side effects, usage guidelines, and a required scope. It could mention output schema or error scenarios but is adequate.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the Focus Time concept and side effects (auto-decline, Chat DND), which gives semantic context beyond parameter descriptions. This lifts the score to 4.

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 tool creates, lists, updates, or deletes Focus Time events, a specific event type. It distinguishes from siblings 'manage_event' and 'manage_out_of_office' by explicitly naming them and specifying what each handles.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool (for Focus Time events) and when to use alternatives (manage_event for regular events, manage_out_of_office for OOO). It also notes side effects and OAuth scope requirements, providing clear guidance.

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