Remove Calendar Event

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds useful context: it uses the WebSocket 'calendar/event/delete' command, returns success status and confirmation, and clarifies that delete is only available via WebSocket. This supplements the annotations without contradiction.

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 well-structured with a clear title, short purpose statement, detailed parameter list, example usage, a note on prerequisite, and return value. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the format is easy to scan. It is appropriately sized for a tool with 4 parameters and an output schema.

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 tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, 2 required, output schema exists), the description covers the essential workflow: obtaining the UID, using required and optional parameters, and understanding the return. It could benefit from mentioning error handling or permission requirements, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use 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 has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description repeats parameter descriptions exactly as in the schema and includes examples demonstrating usage. While examples are helpful, they do not add new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., recurrence_range values are already documented).

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 clearly states 'Delete an event from a calendar', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ha_config_get_calendar_events (get events) and ha_config_set_calendar_event (set/create event) by explicitly focusing on deletion. The mention of the WebSocket command further clarifies the action.

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 a prerequisite note: use ha_config_get_calendar_events to obtain the event UID before deletion. It also explains that delete operations only exist on WebSocket, contrasting with REST services for create/get. However, it does not explicitly exclude usage for modifications or specify when not to use this tool, leaving a minor gap.

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