calendar_create_event

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden but supplies almost nothing: no mention of required permissions, which calendar the event lands on (no calendarId parameter is present), whether attendees are emailed invitations, or whether reminders/notifications fire. 'Optional attendees' is the only behavioral hint, and it is thin for a write operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; it is appropriately sized for the amount of information it conveys, even if that information is sparse.

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?

This is a mutating calendar tool with zero annotation coverage and no output schema, so the description should disclose side effects (invitations, notifications) and target-calendar behavior. It omits all of that, leaving the agent to guess at consequences of the write.

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 all seven parameters already have documented meanings; baseline 3 applies. The description only echoes the attendees parameter and adds no formatting or time zone interpretation notes beyond what the schema states.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new Google Calendar event') and adds scope detail about optional attendees. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling calendar_update_event, though the name makes the create-vs-update split fairly obvious.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this versus calendar_update_event, what prerequisites exist (auth, target calendar), or when not to use it. The agent must infer everything from the name.

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