update_calendar

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Update a calendar's metadata (patch)', implying a partial update, but fails to disclose permissions required, side effects (e.g., whether existing metadata is overwritten), or error conditions. The behavioral information is minimal.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) and front-loaded with the action. However, it sacrifices necessary detail; a slightly longer description with parameter hints would improve usability without harming conciseness.

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's complexity (7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, usage examples, or how the optional parameters modify behavior. The agent lacks sufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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 input schema has 7 parameters with 0% description coverage, yet the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. It merely says 'metadata' without explaining the role of summary, description, time_zone, location, account, or password. The agent gains no additional insight into parameter semantics.

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 identifies the tool's action: updating a calendar's metadata. It uses a specific verb 'Update' and resource 'calendar's metadata', with '(patch)' indicating a partial update. While it distinguishes from related create/delete tools, it does not differentiate from 'update_calendar_subscription' or similar siblings.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_calendar or update_calendar_subscription. The description does not include when-not conditions or explicit context for usage.

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