Cancel Calendar Event

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects. It explicitly states that attendees are notified and the required permission, which are critical. It doesn't mention irreversibility or the ultimate fate of the event, but the key behavioral aspects are covered.

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: two sentences covering the core behavior and permission, followed by Chinese intent examples. It is front-loaded and contains no fluff or redundancy.

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 two-parameter cancellation tool with no output schema, the description covers essential context: the action, the actor constraint, required permission, and the notification side effect. It could benefit from explicit mention of when not to use it (e.g., when not the organizer), but it is adequately complete for its simplicity.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage, each with descriptions). The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action (cancel), the target resource (a meeting organized by the signed-in user), and the side effect (notify attendees). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like calendar_delete_event by emphasizing the notification behavior.

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 provides clear context: only meetings organized by the signed-in user can be cancelled, and it requires delegated Calendars.ReadWrite. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with calendar_delete_event or calendar_respond_to_event, so it lacks explicit when-not guidance.

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