create_event

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

There are no annotations, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only restates the creation action and does not mention side effects, return value, persistence, or important nuances like all-day inference and exclusive end dates, which the schema documents but the description does not surface.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose and key fields. There is no filler, redundant phrasing, or unnecessary structure.

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?

Despite a detailed input schema, this is a mutating tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description does not explain what happens after creation, what response to expect, or the non-obvious all-day/EXCLUSIVE end-date behavior, leaving significant contextual gaps for an agent.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3 even without parameter details in the description. The description adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema and omits the required calendar_url parameter, but the schema fully covers all parameter meanings.

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 a specific verb ('Create'), a precise resource ('calendar event'), and the main fields (title, date, time, optional description, location). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like update_event, delete_event, and create_contact.

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 word 'new' implies creation rather than modification, so an agent can infer this tool is for creating events rather than updating or deleting them. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like update_event or state when not to use this tool.

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