Delete an Outlook calendar event by EntryID when an appointment is canceled or no longer needed.
Deletes a calendar event from Outlook by EntryID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.0.416Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It states the destructive action but does not disclose permission requirements, irreversibility, handling of recurring events, or what happens when the EntryID is invalid. Similar to the calibration example for an unannotated 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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, target system, and intended identifier immediately.
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 calendar mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits how to obtain the EntryID, whether deletion is permanent, required permissions, and how it relates to sibling delete tools.
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 has 0 parameters, which normally gives a baseline of 4. However, the description introduces an EntryID requirement that is not present in the schema, so the agent cannot actually supply it. This adds confusing or unusable semantic information rather than useful parameter guidance.
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: deletes a calendar event from Outlook. It distinguishes itself from list/create/update siblings, but does not differentiate from other delete-event tools such as delete_calendar_event or m365_delete_event. It also references an EntryID that the input schema does not expose.
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 given on when to use this tool versus delete_calendar_event, m365_delete_event, or other calendar tools. Prerequisites, confirmation requirements, and error conditions are absent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.