Delete event

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

Annotations already signal destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable behavioral context by emphasizing 'irreversible' and 'permanently delete', which goes beyond the annotation. It also clarifies that this tool only affects calendar events, not workouts, preventing misuse. This is useful context despite the annotations covering the core destructive nature.

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 short sentences with zero filler. Each sentence earns its place: the first states the destructive nature, the second provides the source of the ID and the alternative for workouts. Information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 2-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers all needed context: irreversibility, how to get the ID, and the distinction from workout deletion. The schema covers the athlete parameter adequately, and the description fills the gaps. Nothing critical is missing for the agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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 input schema provides descriptions for only the 'athlete' parameter (50% coverage), leaving 'event_id' undocumented. The description compensates for this gap by explicitly stating 'Event ID from tp_get_events', adding crucial meaning to the event_id parameter. It does not repeat the athlete schema description, which is already clear. This adds meaningful information beyond the schema.

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's function: 'Permanently delete a race/event from the calendar'. It uses a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('race/event from the calendar'), and directly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool tp_delete_workout by noting calendar workouts are separate. This leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: it tells the agent to obtain the event ID from tp_get_events, and explicitly directs that calendar workouts should be deleted with tp_delete_workout instead. This gives clear context for selecting this tool over alternatives and names the specific sibling tool, which is exactly what the dimension asks for.

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