set_destination_calendar

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is a PUT-only mutating operation (set destination), which is clear. It does not detail side effects (e.g., overwrites previous destination), authorization needs, or rate limits, but the essential behavioral trait is communicated.

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 succinct with two sentences that front-load the main purpose. The second sentence adds instructional value about retrieval. No wasted words.

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 has only 3 parameters with 100% schema coverage, an output schema exists (though not shown), and no annotations, the description is adequate. It explains the action, the method limitation, and how to verify the setting. It could note that existing bookings are unaffected, but overall it is sufficient.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema descriptions (e.g., it references calendar email/ID and credential ID from list_calendars, but that information is already in the schema's property descriptions). No extra semantic value.

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 the tool sets the destination calendar for new bookings and specifies it is a PUT-only operation. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like add_selected_calendar or remove_selected_calendar, which are related but distinct calendar operations.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool (to set destination calendar for new bookings) and when not (mentions that it is PUT only, and refers to list_calendars for retrieval). It lacks direct mention of alternatives or exclusions, but the context of destination calendar versus other calendar operations is reasonably clear.

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