Delete calendar event

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that cancellations are not sent to attendees, explains the effect of omitting occurrence (deleting the whole series), and instructs to check warnings in the result. This goes beyond typical expectations for a delete tool.

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 yet comprehensive, front-loading the core action and then providing conditional details in a logical order. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the complexity of handling recurring events and the existence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary information: deletion scope, recurrence handling, cancellation behavior, and result inspection. Nothing critical is missing.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly explains the meaning and usage of occurrence and and_following, which are the non-obvious parameters. Event_id and calendar_name are self-explanatory from their names and the description's context. The description effectively adds meaning to all 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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('event'), and clearly distinguishes deletion of a single event from deletion of a recurring series. It differentiates from siblings like update_event and list_events by focusing on deletion semantics and mentioning list_events for obtaining recurrence IDs.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use the occurrence and and_following parameters, and explains the behavior for recurring events. It does not explicitly list when not to use this tool versus alternatives, but the context is clear from the tool name and the description, so it is not misleading.

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