Create Calendar

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

Annotations already declare this as a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive external write, and the description aligns with those hints. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as duplicate-calendar side effects or permission requirements, but the structured annotations carry enough of that burden to make the gap moderate rather than severe.

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 one short sentence with no filler, starts with the operative verb, and states the core resource and scope immediately. Every word earns its place, and nothing is redundant with the tool name or title.

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 simple scalar-parameter create operation with full schema coverage and an output schema, this description is nearly sufficient for correct invocation. The main missing elements are usage context and side-effect nuance, but those are partly addressed by annotations and do not block an agent from calling the tool correctly.

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?

The schema documents all four parameters with descriptions and defaults, so the 100% schema coverage means the description does not need to compensate. The description adds no parameter-specific nuance, so the schema-driven baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific action ('Creates') and a specific resource ('a new secondary Google Calendar'), which clearly distinguishes it from list_calendars or event-management tools. The word 'secondary' adds important scope by indicating this tool does not create or modify the primary calendar.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_calendars or manage_event. It also does not mention prerequisites like Google authentication or any exclusions beyond the word 'secondary', leaving the agent to infer usage context from the tool name and sibling list.

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