clio_create_calendar_entry

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that a calendar entry is created and may be tied to a matter, but it does not describe side effects, return behavior, required permissions, or how all_day or timezone values are treated.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It conveys the core action and key optional relationship efficiently, though it sacrifices detail that might be expected for an 8-parameter tool.

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 create endpoint with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is underspecified. It omits return value information, field-level semantics beyond the schema's meager coverage, and behavioral details such as how all_day interacts with start_at/end_at.

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 only 38% (3 of 8 parameters described in the schema). The description adds minimal value by clarifying calendar_id's role and noting matter_id is optional, but it does not explain summary, start_at, end_at, all_day, location, or description, which are essential for correct invocation.

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 a specific action ('Create') on a specific resource ('calendar entry'), and adds scope by noting it occurs 'on a calendar' and may be optionally linked to a matter. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like clio_get_calendar_entry, clio_update_calendar_entry, and clio_delete_calendar_entry.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as clio_create_task or clio_log_time. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or typical scenarios, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and siblings.

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