Create a calendar appointment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that start and end are ISO datetimes and that all-day events can have end equal start. However, it does not mention any side effects, required permissions, or error behavior. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose. It is efficient and avoids fluff. Could be slightly more structured by grouping explanations, but still clear.

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 tool has 7 parameters (3 required), no output schema. The description covers the core usage (subject, start, end, attendees) and all-day behavior, but omits explanation for location, notes, and error/return handling. Complete enough for typical use but not exhaustive.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains start/end format and the need for family_members IDs for attendees. However, it does not describe subject, all_day, notes, location, or their interplay. Only partial value added.

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 title 'Create a calendar appointment' and description clearly state the verb ('Create') and resource ('calendar appointment'). This directly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_appointment, update_appointment, and get_calendar.

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 guidance on when to use this tool: it mentions calling family_members() first to get attendee IDs. It also specifies the ISO datetime format for start and end. While it does not explicitly state when not to use it, the context of creation vs deletion/update is clear.

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