delete-calendar-event

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context the annotations don't carry: the three deletion scopes for recurring events and the prerequisite of using the occurrence event ID. It could go further on irreversibility or permission requirements, hence not a 5.

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?

It is front-loaded with purpose, then groups recurring-event semantics under a bolded heading and ends with concrete examples. Every section earns its place; the parenthetical Korean gloss is minor noise but harmless.

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 3-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, mode semantics, prerequisite lookup, and even the return value ('success message'). The only remaining gap is the absence of an explicit irreversibility warning, though destructiveHint already signals this.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description earns extra credit by expanding deleteType far beyond the schema's one-line description, enumerating each enum value and stating the default ('this'), which is exactly the semantics an agent needs to choose correctly.

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 ('Delete a Dooray calendar event') and scopes it against siblings like update-calendar-event and create-calendar-event. The recurring-event subsection further refines what "delete" means in this context, so an agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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?

It gives concrete conditions for the deleteType modes and explicitly directs the agent to get-calendar-event-list to obtain the correct occurrence event ID for recurring events. It stops short of explicitly stating when not to use it (e.g., to cancel a single instance the agent should use update instead), so it is clear guidance without full exclusions.

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