update-calendar

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the constraint about the default calendar name, which is useful. However, other behaviors (permissions, side effects) are not disclosed.

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, all front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: the action, an example, and a critical constraint. No redundancy or wasted 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?

No output schema, so return values are not needed. The description covers only name and color as examples, but the schema has many more properties. For a complex tool, more context about updatable fields would help completeness.

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% (baseline 3). The description adds value by providing a concrete body example and flagging that the default calendar's name cannot be updated, which is not evident from the schema alone.

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 'Updates a calendar's properties' and provides an example with name and color. The phrase 'navigation property' is technical but the tip clarifies. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update-calendar-event by targeting the calendar itself.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. While siblings exist (create-calendar, delete-calendar), no guidance is provided for selection. The only guideline is a constraint about not updating the default calendar's name.

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