Create calendar event

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-idempotence. The description adds useful context that events can be created in multiple subcalendars, which is beyond the annotations. It does not contradict annotations, though it doesn't elaborate on return values or side effects.

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 sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and includes a helpful API documentation link. It is compact with no filler or redundant information.

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 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It offers a link to API documentation, which may compensate, but the description itself lacks details on return behavior or operational nuances. For a create tool, this leaves some gaps.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description does not add explicit detail on any specific parameter, though it implicitly highlights subCalendars by mentioning 'one or more subcalendars'. No extra semantic meaning is provided 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 uses the specific verb 'Create' and identifies the resource as an event, while additionally noting it can target 'one or more kalender.digital subcalendars'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_event and delete_event.

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 implies use for creating events but gives no explicit comparison to alternatives such as update_event or delete_event, nor does it state when not to use this tool. The API link provides external reference but no direct usage guidance.

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