delete_calendar

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and the primary calendar restriction, lacking details on side effects (e.g., events deletion), permissions required, or reversibility. This is insufficient for a destructive 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?

The description is a single sentence with 7 words, front-loading the action and constraint. Every word is necessary and earns its place. It is highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description omits important context such as the fate of events within the deleted calendar, irreversibility, and authentication requirements. Parameter semantics are under-explained, and no differentiation from similar tools (e.g., clear_calendar) is provided.

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. It explains calendar_id implicitly via context, but does not clarify the purpose of 'account' and 'password' parameters, which are optional. The agent lacks guidance on when to provide these parameters.

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 verb 'delete' and the resource 'a secondary calendar', and explicitly distinguishes from primary calendar deletion. It effectively differentiates from sibling tools like create_calendar or clear_calendar by specifying the action and constraint.

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 a clear when-not-use condition: cannot delete the primary calendar. This guides the agent away from invalid calls. However, it does not mention alternatives like clear_calendar or prerequisites for deletion, so it is not fully explicit.

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