Delete a calendar event

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that deletion is IRREVERSIBLE with no undo or bin, and that the event is read before deletion so the answer indicates what was removed. The destructiveHint annotation is reinforced with concrete behavioral consequences, adding real value.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. The critical irreversibility warning is front-loaded, followed by the pre-read behavior and the invocation condition. Every sentence earns its place.

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 destructive tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral context: irreversibility, what the response will indicate, and the condition for calling. Combined with the annotations and fully documented schema, nothing critical is missing.

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%, so the schema already fully documents all four parameters. The description does not add parameter-specific detail beyond the schema, which is acceptable and earns the baseline score.

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 and resource: 'Delete an event.' The action is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like calendar_update_event or calendar_get_event. The first sentence directly matches the title, leaving no doubt about 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?

Provides clear usage context: 'Only do this when the user has clearly asked for it.' This is an explicit condition for invocation, especially important for a destructive action. It does not name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the guidance is sufficient and clear.

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