create-specific-calendar-event

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, signaling a mutation tool. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating the calendar scope (user or group). It does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, or rate limits, providing limited extra value over annotations.

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 concise with two sentences and a tip, totaling about 60 words. It front-loads the core purpose and includes a helpful callout. However, it could be slightly more structured by explicitly separating the event creation scope from the tip.

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?

Given the complexity of the body parameter with many nested fields, the description is minimal. The schema compensates with detailed descriptions for many properties. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not explain return values or typical usage patterns, leaving some 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?

With schema description coverage at 80%, the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters like body, calendarId, confirm, includeHeaders, excludeResponse. The tip about attendees relates to usage guidance rather than parameter semantics.

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 new event in a calendar, specifying the verb 'create' and resource 'event'. It mentions calendars for users or Microsoft 365 groups. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'create-calendar-event' tool, which might create an event in a default calendar without requiring a calendarId.

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 includes a critical tip about not guessing email addresses and using list-users, which provides guidance for a common use case (adding attendees). However, it lacks explicit instructions on when to use this tool versus other calendar event creation tools, and does not state when not to use it.

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