Calendar Delete Event

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, which indicate mutation. The description adds the key behavioral detail that it deletes the entire series for recurring events and sends email cancellations to attendees, which goes beyond the annotations. This is valuable context for the agent to understand side effects.

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 one sentence, clear and impactful. It front-loads the core action and includes the critical side effects concisely. No wasted words.

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 is destructive and has an output schema, the description covers the essential side effects and parameter source. It might benefit from mentioning what the output contains or any error conditions, but the output schema can handle that. Overall, it's sufficient for an agent to call it 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 schema has 100% coverage, meaning the parameter event_id is fully described in the input schema. The description reinforces that the event_id is from calendar_list_events or calendar_search_events, which adds useful sourcing context. However, it doesn't add much else, so a 4 is fair given the schema already covers it.

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 (delete an event) and the resource (event), and specifies that it deletes the whole series for recurring events. It distinguishes itself from calendar_update_event and other siblings by noting the email cancellation 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?

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the action is self-evident. It implies usage for deleting events, and mentions it applies to recurring events, which helps. However, it lacks guidance on when not to use it (e.g., for non-recurring events or for deleting a single occurrence).

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