update_events

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds meaningful behavioral context: the POST endpoint, patch semantics, and sendUpdates notification control. This goes beyond the annotations and does not contradict them.

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 dense but organized, leading with the action and trigger, then presenting the endpoint shape and parameter details. Every sentence contributes useful information, though the inline JSON example makes it a bit sprawling.

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?

The description covers the request shape, mutation semantics, and notification options, which is enough to invoke the tool correctly. The absence of return-value information is a minor gap, but with openWorldHint and no output schema, the agent mainly needs invocation details.

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%, but the description compensates thoroughly. It explains that mutations_json is a JSON array, lists the mutation object fields, specifies patch semantics, and enumerates sendUpdates values. This gives the agent everything needed to construct the parameter.

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: 'Update one or more existing events.' The 'Call when changing time/title/details' reinforces the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from create_event and delete_events 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?

Explicitly states when to call: when changing time/title/details. It also gives operational guidance like patching eventData and keeping summary visible, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools or define when not to use it, so it falls just 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.