skylight_update_event_notification_settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'update' adds no new behavioral information. It does not disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or whether changes are reversible, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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 concise sentence, but it is severely under-specified for a tool with 4 undocumented parameters. The brevity is not appropriate given the cognitive load required to understand the schema.

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?

With no output schema, minimal annotations, and 0% parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the notification settings are, how they relate to frames or events, or what an agent should expect after calling the tool. The presence of a sibling getter makes this even more important.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining the four parameters (early, frameId, on_time, early_minutes_before). It provides zero parameter-level detail, making it impossible to know what values are valid or what each parameter controls.

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 verb (update) and resource (calendar-event notification settings), clearly distinguishing it from get counterparts like skylight_get_event_notification_settings. It is not vague, but it doesn't explicitly mention scope or parameters, which prevents a perfect score.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like skylight_get_event_notification_settings or skylight_update_event. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context about when an agent should prefer this over other update tools.

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