calendarCreateEvent

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While it states this is a creation operation, it doesn't mention required permissions, whether the operation is idempotent, error conditions, or what happens on success/failure. The description adds some context about time format requirements but lacks comprehensive behavioral information for a mutation tool.

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 appropriately concise with two sentences that each add value. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides critical format details for time parameters. There's no wasted language, though the structure could be slightly improved with clearer separation between purpose and parameter guidance.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after creation, error handling, required permissions, or the relationship between parameters. The time format guidance is helpful but doesn't compensate for the significant gaps in behavioral and contextual information.

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 29%, but the description adds meaningful context for start_time, end_time, and timezone parameters by specifying format requirements (10-digit unix seconds string) and providing a timezone example. However, it doesn't address the other 4 parameters (calendar_id, summary, description, need_notification) beyond what the minimal schema provides.

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 action ('创建日程' - create event) and resource ('在指定日历下' - under specified calendar), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'calendarListEvents' or 'feishu_calendar_event', which would require a 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple calendar-related sibling tools (calendarListCalendars, calendarListEvents, feishu_calendar_event, feishu_calendar_freebusy) but no indication of when this create operation is appropriate versus listing or other calendar operations.

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