create_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of disclosure. It only mentions the future date constraint and does not cover authorization needs, side effects, default behaviors, or what happens on success/failure. For a creation tool, this is insufficient.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words, achieving brevity. However, it could be restructured to include key constraints upfront and additional context without significant extra length.

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 has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely lacking. It does not explain return values, required parameters, defaults, or the impact of parameters like 'name' or 'type'. The minimal description leaves an agent underinformed.

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 tool description adds no information about parameters beyond what the input schema provides. With schema description coverage at 40%, the description should compensate for gaps but does not. For example, it does not clarify the meaning of 'type' or the importance of 'description' syntax for WORKOUT category.

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 (create a new event on the calendar) and adds a specific constraint (must be in the future). The tool name and description together distinguish it from siblings like create_workout (workout vs event) and update_event (create vs update).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_workout, delete_future_event, or update_event. The only usage information is the future date constraint, which does not help an agent decide between sibling tools.

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