bulk_delete_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says nothing about the irreversible/destructive nature of deletion, required permissions, partial-failure behavior when some eventIds are invalid, or what a dryRun returns — all critical for a bulk destructive mutation.

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?

Two short sentences with the core action front-loaded and no wasted text. The second sentence is mildly promotional but does carry the differentiation from delete_event.

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?

The parameters are fully covered by the schema and no output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. Still, for a bulk destructive tool with zero annotations, the description omits safety-critical context (irreversibility, partial failures) that an agent should know before invoking it.

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%, and the dryRun, eventIds, and calendarId parameters are all documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint details beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Delete') and resource ('calendar events') with a clear scope qualifier ('multiple ... in one call'). It also names the sibling delete_event, distinguishing itself from the single-item variant, though the distinction is framed as efficiency rather than a semantic difference.

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?

'Much more efficient than calling delete_event repeatedly' implies the tool is for bulk/multi-event deletion rather than a single event. However, it offers no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer selection criteria from the sibling name alone.

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