create_event

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It explicitly signals a mutating operation ('Add') and discloses an important behavior: the start format selects between timed and all-day events. It does not mention interaction with the all_day schema default or return behavior, but the core side effect is clear.

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 sentences with no filler. The operation is front-loaded, followed immediately by the most important input formatting rule.

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?

Given seven parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is incomplete. It enables a basic call but leaves ambiguity around required title handling, end behavior, all_day interaction, timezone/calendar selection, and what the tool returns.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only clarifies the start parameter's format. The other six parameters—title, end, note, all_day, calendar, and timezone—receive no semantic guidance, leaving the agent to infer their meaning from names alone.

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 a clear verb and resource: 'Add a calendar event.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_contact and create_task, and from list_events/delete_event, because it explicitly names the target domain object.

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 intended use is implied clearly by 'Add a calendar event,' but the description provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling tool to choose instead. There are no exclusion rules or alternative routing hints.

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