rename_calendar

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context by explaining that passing null or an empty string clears the override and falls back to the provider's name. This is not obvious from annotations or schema and enhances transparency without contradiction.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second covers an important edge case. Information is front-loaded and every word 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameter source, and override behavior. The output schema exists, so return value details are unnecessary. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

The schema provides no descriptions for parameters, but the description compensates fully by explaining that calendar_id is sourced from list_calendars and that custom_name uses null/empty to clear the override. This adds crucial meaning beyond the raw type definitions, making parameter usage clear.

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 uses a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('display name for a calendar'), making the tool's function unambiguous. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like list_calendars or create_event, as it focuses on renaming. The inclusion of the clearing behavior adds precision.

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: calendar_id must come from list_calendars, and null/empty clears the override. This guides correct usage. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or scenarios where this tool should not be used, so it falls short of full explicit when-to-use guidance.

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