create_calendar_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only mentions creation and default task_type, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., does it trigger notifications?), required permissions, or whether it updates existing events. This is insufficient for an agent to understand behavioral implications.

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 one sentence (18 words), concise and front-loaded with the core action. It is efficient but may be too brief for complex tools; however, no additional structure is needed given its clarity.

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 tool has 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description only covers a few parameters and does not explain return values or behaviors like conflict checks or notifications. This is incomplete for an agent to fully understand usage and outcomes.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that scheduled_date, start_time, end_time are used, and task_type defaults to 'meeting'. However, it does not describe other parameters like duration_minutes, description, why, priority, limiting the agent's understanding of their purpose.

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 a calendar event, specifying it is a task with scheduled_date, start_time, end_time, and default task_type='meeting'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create_task and schedule_task by defining the specific resource and default behavior.

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 that this tool is for creating events with time components, distinguishing it from general task creation. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool (e.g., for tasks without times) or direct to alternatives, leaving room for ambiguity.

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