bulk_delete_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the return type (deletion confirmation) but does not disclose irreversibility, partial failure behavior, permission requirements, or whether the operation is atomic. For a destructive bulk operation, this is a significant gap.

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 purpose and efficiency benefit are front-loaded, and the Args/Returns sections are clearly structured. Some redundancy exists with the schema, but overall it is concise and readable.

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?

The description covers purpose, efficiency, and return type adequately. With an output schema present, return details are not critical. However, for a bulk delete tool, it lacks information about error handling, partial success, or validation of IDs, which would be expected for such a destructive operation.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema—it notes the IDs are integers, but the schema already provides an example. No extra syntax or format details are given.

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?

Clearly states it deletes multiple calendar events in a single operation. Distinguishes from the sibling delete_event by noting bulk/multiple events and efficiency, so purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly notes it is more efficient than deleting events one at a time, implying use for bulk deletions. However, it doesn't name the alternative tool (delete_event) or state when NOT to use it, so it's just short of explicit guidance.

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