Cancel an appointment

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description adds that attendees are notified and that omitting both attendeeId and cancelAll leads to rejection. This expands on the annotation 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 concise, with only two sentences that are front-loaded with the main purpose. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no 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?

The description covers key behavioral aspects (notifications, parameter requirements) and explains the parameters well. However, it lacks return value details and does not mention what happens after cancellation (e.g., confirmation).

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?

With 50% schema coverage, the description adds value by explaining the roles of attendeeId and cancelAll (remove one vs cancel all), which is more informative than the schema's brief descriptions.

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 'Cancel an appointment and notify attendees,' specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes between individual attendee removal and full cancellation, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 when-to-use criteria: 'pass attendeeId to remove one person, or cancelAll to cancel the whole appointment — passing neither is rejected.' This prevents misuse, though it does not compare directly to sibling tools like reschedule or list.

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