accept-calendar-event

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint: true and readOnlyHint: false, aligning with the description's 'Accept' action. The description adds behavioral detail about the optional body parameters (sendResponse, comment) and the ability to suppress notifications, going beyond annotation basics.

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, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence serves a purpose: stating the function, then providing a practical usage tip. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the action and key parameter option but omits return value behavior, error scenarios, or prerequisites. EventId is required but not described. The tool is relatively simple, so completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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%, and the description explains the 'body' object's sendResponse and comment fields. However, it does not describe eventId, includeHeaders, or excludeResponse, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone. The description adds value for body parameters but not for other required fields.

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' and mentions it accepts a meeting invitation. The tool name is unambiguous, and siblings like 'decline-calendar-event' and 'tentatively-accept-calendar-event' distinguish it.

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 explicitly guides when to use silent acceptance ('Set sendResponse to false to accept silently without notifying the organizer'). While it doesn't contrast with alternative actions like tentatively accept or decline, the context is clear enough for most use cases.

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