delete_events

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

Annotations already include destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description reinforces 'Destructive'. It adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations by requiring confirmation and specifying sendUpdates side-effect options (all|none|externalOnly), which is valuable for an agent deciding whether to invoke it.

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 compact and dense, front-loading the action and confirmation warning before providing the request shape and option values. Every clause adds operational value and there is no filler.

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?

For a single-parameter destructive mutation tool with strong annotations and no output schema, the description covers the call condition, payload structure, parameter type, and important option values. An agent has sufficient information to invoke 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 only defines mutations_json as a string with no description, but the description compensates by clarifying 'mutations_json: JSON array' and specifying the mutation object fields and sendUpdates enum. This gives the agent enough meaning to construct the parameter correctly despite 0% schema description coverage.

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 opens with 'Delete one or more events', a specific verb and resource, and is reinforced by the POST /v2/deleteEvents endpoint. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like update_events or search_events, so an agent can identify what this tool does without ambiguity.

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 gives an explicit condition: 'Call only after confirming which event(s)'. This provides clear when-to-use context, though it does not name alternatives or state when not to use the tool beyond the confirmation requirement.

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