sac_calendar_copy_event

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only repeats the action without disclosing behavioral traits like authentication, side effects, or what 'copy' entails. The schema describes allowalteration as 'Must be true to execute', but the description adds no context.

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 single sentence is under-specified rather than concise. It fails to provide sufficient detail to warrant its brevity.

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 the complexity of copy/create operations and lack of output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the 'body' should contain (e.g., source event ID) or the role of 'allowalteration'.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 states 'Copy/create a calendar event' which indicates the action but uses an ambiguous compound verb. It does not clearly distinguish between copying an existing event and creating a new one, nor does it specify the resource context (e.g., which calendar).

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings like sac_calendar_get_event or sac_calendar_update_event. No prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions are mentioned.

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