insert_calendar_list

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

Annotations already establish this is a mutating, non-destructive, open-world operation. The description adds the concrete endpoint and payload shape ('POST /v2/insertCalendarList {mutation:{provider, accountId, calendarId, calendarData?}}'), which is useful. However, it does not disclose side effects, permissions, or what happens if the calendar already exists.

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 front-loaded: purpose first, then endpoint shape, then usage trigger. Every sentence contributes meaningful information 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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation, the request format, the key payload fields, and the when-to-use context. It is missing return behavior and full field semantics, but those are less critical for such a simple insert-like call.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for the bare 'mutation_json' string parameter. It does provide a useful nested object shape, but it also says 'mutation_json: JSON object' while the schema types it as a string, leaving ambiguity about whether the agent should send an object or a JSON-encoded string.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Subscribe/add a calendar to the user's calendar list.' This clearly identifies the operation and distinguishes it from siblings like get_calendar_lists, update_calendars, and delete_calendar_list. The additional phrase 'Call when adding a shared calendar' cements the intended purpose.

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 explicitly says 'Call when adding a shared calendar,' giving a clear condition for use. It does not enumerate alternatives, but the sibling set and the insert/delete naming convention make the contrast reasonably inferable.

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