timetree_delete_event

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly warns that the operation cannot be undone and requires confirm=true, which is essential for a destructive write operation and goes beyond the schema's parameter-level requirements.

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 two short, direct sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and then adds the two critical warnings: irreversibility and confirmation.

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 description covers the main destructive behavior and confirm flag, but without annotations or an output schema it leaves some ambiguity about the expected response and what happens if the event or calendar is invalid. Still, the core invocation surface is reasonably understandable.

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 33%, and the description does not compensate for the underdocumented event_uuid and calendar_id parameters. It only restates the confirm requirement already present in the schema, so it adds no real guidance for constructing the other parameters.

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 states the specific action ('Delete') and the resource ('TimeTree event'), making it immediately distinguishable from related tools like timetree_update_event or timetree_delete_memo. It is not tautological and names exactly what the tool does.

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 makes clear this is the deletion path and explicitly calls out the confirm=true prerequisite. However, it does not state when to prefer this over alternatives or mention any conditions that would make deletion inappropriate.

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