delete_event

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: dry_run defaults to true and performs no mutation, `span` is silently ignored for non-recurring events, and EventKit/Calendar access is required. Those are exactly the surprises that would otherwise cause an accidental deletion.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then clauses ordered by risk (span, then the dry_run default, then permissions). Every sentence adds a fact; nothing is restated from the schema.

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?

A destructive mutation tool with an output schema that needn't be explained. The description covers the safety default, the recurrence branch, permissions, and id provenance — the full set of things an agent must know before acting.

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 0% and the schema gives no enum for `span`, so the description fully carries the load: it supplies the accepted values 'this-event' and 'future-events' and their meaning, the null/single-event behavior, and the default-true semantics of `dry_run`. All three parameters are covered with meaning beyond type.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a calendar event by id.' Among siblings like delete_reminder, delete_note, and delete_draft, the 'calendar event' qualifier makes the target 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?

Explicit conditional rules: `span` is required only for recurring targets and ignored for single events, and `dry_run` defaults to true so the agent knows the default call is a preview. It also routes the agent to `events` for obtaining the id. It doesn't distinguish itself from `update_event` for edge cases like moving a single occurrence, which keeps it short of a 5.

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