accept-calendar-event

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint as true. The description adds behavioral detail about silent acceptance (sendResponse: false) and optionally sending a comment, which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction.

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 two sentences plus a tip line, all concise and front-loaded with the core action. No 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?

For a destructive action with a nested body parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: the action, optional settings, and silent mode. Lacks details on prerequisites or recurrence handling, but adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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 75% (3 of 4 parameters have descriptions). The description adds value for the body parameter with an example usage { sendResponse: true, comment: 'I will attend.' }, clarifying its properties beyond 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 clearly states 'Accept the specified event in a user calendar', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like decline-calendar-event and tentatively-accept-calendar-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 tip provides explicit guidance on optional body parameters, including when to set sendResponse to true or false. However, it does not compare to alternatives like decline-calendar-event or tentatively-accept-calendar-event.

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