delete_event

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. While 'Delete' conveys destructiveness, the description does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, whether it affects related resources, what permissions are required, or what response/errors to expect. These are important gaps for a mutation tool without annotation safety signals.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It conveys the action, target, and key parameter provenance efficiently, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 tool is simple, with one required parameter and no output schema or annotations. The description adequately explains the input and its origin, but it omits return behavior, error cases, and permanence of deletion. For a minimal tool this is acceptable, yet not fully complete.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'resource' parameter. It does so meaningfully by explaining that the parameter is a resource path obtained from list_events, clarifying both the value's nature and its source. It stops short of providing format examples, but for a single parameter this is strong compensation.

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 specific action ('Delete a calendar event'), the target resource, and the required identifier ('resource path'). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like list_events, create_event, and complete_task by indicating this is the deletion operation for calendar events.

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 clear context by noting the resource path comes from list_events, implicitly directing the agent to call list_events first. It does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or name alternatives, but for a unique delete operation among the given siblings, this level of guidance is sufficient.

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