Move or reschedule an event

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: duration is preserved when new_end is omitted, send_notifications controls attendee emails with default true, and account selection is contextual. It doesn't discuss side effects like whether the original event is removed, but it doesn't contradict the annotations.

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 well structured and front-loaded: the core purpose comes first, then a compact behavioral example, then a tight Args list. Every sentence earns its place without redundant 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?

Given the 7-parameter complexity, existing output schema, and annotations, the description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It covers all parameters, key behavior, default notification behavior, and the account selection mechanism.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining all seven parameters in plain terms, including the 'duration is preserved' nuance and the meaning of destination_calendar_id. This is far more useful than the raw schema titles alone.

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 a specific action ('Reschedule an event, and/or move it to a different calendar') tied to a concrete resource. The 'right tool for push my 2pm back an hour' example makes the tool's distinct role easy to grasp relative to broader calendar mutation tools.

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 gives explicit usage conditions: supplying only new_start preserves duration, and supplying destination_calendar_id transfers calendars. It also tells users where event_id should come from (find_events). However, it never explicitly names alternatives like update_event or states when not to use this tool.

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