add_calendar_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Creates a new calendar event' without disclosing side effects, permission requirements, or whether the event is persistent. For a mutation tool, this lacks sufficient behavioral context.

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 concise and well-structured with a lead sentence and bullet points for key parameters. It is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place, though the content is very short. It could be considered under-specified, so not a 5.

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?

With 6 parameters, no annotations, and a mutation operation, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values (though output schema exists), prerequisites, or side effects. It covers only basic creation and two parameter hints. Insufficient for an intelligent agent to invoke safely and 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add useful info by specifying calendar_name examples and ISO-8601 format for timestamps, which are critical. However, it omits the semantics of summary, start_iso, end_iso (beyond format), location, and description, leaving gaps for 6 parameters.

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 explicitly states 'Creates a new calendar event' using a clear verb (Creates) and resource (calendar event). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_upcoming_calendar_events and delete_calendar_event. However, it could better specify the event's scope or requirements, so it does not earn a 5.

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 implies it is used to create a calendar event, and sibling tools clearly cover retrieval and deletion. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives (e.g., when to use add_google_task or create_github_issue). Usage is implied, not stated.

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