cancel_event

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

Annotations already mark it destructive, but the description adds valuable context: 'Cannot be undone', 'notify=True sends a cancellation to attendees', and provider-specific differences (iCloud treats already-deleted as success vs error on Google/Microsoft). This goes well beyond the annotation hints.

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 concise sentences: action+consequence, parameter sourcing, and behavior variants. Each sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 irreversibility, parameter sources, side effects (notify), and cross-provider error handling. Combined with the output schema, this is complete for a destructive cancellation tool.

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?

Despite 0% schema_description_coverage, the description compensates fully by explaining where each ID comes from (list_connections, list_calendars, get_agenda) and what notify does. All four parameters (connection_id, calendar_id, event_id, notify) receive meaningful semantics.

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 'Cancel (delete) one event' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_event and reschedule_event. The added 'Cannot be undone' reinforces the destructive nature.

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?

It explains how to obtain required parameters (connection_id, calendar_id, event_id) from other tools, which is clear usage context. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but no alternative cancellation tool exists, so the lack of exclusions is acceptable.

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