delete_event

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the critical safety behavior: without confirm=true the call is a preview only, and delete_all expands the scope to all occurrences across days. It does not mention permissions, irreversibility, or rate limits, so a small gap remains.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action before the two parameter behaviors. No filler, though the flag semantics could be grouped more tightly.

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 three-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential information an agent needs: the destructive action, the preview-by-default gate, and the widened scope flag. Permission and return-value details are absent but not required to invoke 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does for confirm (preview vs real delete) and delete_all (all occurrences over multiple days). Only event_id is unexplained, but that is self-evident from its name and required status.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Supprime un événement'), and the resource name itself distinguishes it from siblings like delete_signup and delete_user. It is clear but does not explicitly contrast itself with any alternative event tool.

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 explains the confirm gate ('Sans confirm=true : aperçu seulement') and the delete_all scope, which is real usage context for the parameters. However it never says when to prefer this tool over siblings such as update_event or the various delete_signup variants, so tool-selection guidance is left to inference.

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