teamleader_create_event

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden, but it only says 'Create a new calendar event' without mentioning side effects like invitations, confirmations, required permissions, or what the response contains. This is minimal transparency for a mutation tool.

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?

One short, direct sentence with no filler or repetition. It is front-loaded with the verb and clearly identifies the action and target, achieving maximum conciseness.

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 has 7 parameters and no output schema, so the description is relatively sparse. However, the schema covers parameter semantics well. Missing context includes return value expectations and how to choose between this and similar session tools, which prevents a higher score.

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% for all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter explanations beyond what is already in the schema, but it doesn't need to since the schema is thorough.

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 clearly states the action ('Create'), the resource ('calendar event'), and the system ('Teamleader Focus'). It is specific enough to distinguish from read-only event tools like teamleader_list_events and teamleader_get_event, even though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from teamleader_meetings_create.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like teamleader_meetings_create or teamleader_calls_create. There is no mention of prerequisites such as looking up activity_type_id, nor any exclusions or alternative suggestions.

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