calendar_delete_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not say whether deletion is permanent or recoverable, how recurring events are handled, whether attendees are notified, or what permissions are required. Only the destructive verb 'delete' hints at the risk profile.

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?

A single short sentence with the action front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though the brevity is partly the result of under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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?

This is a destructive mutation with no annotations, no output schema, and no documented side effects. An agent has no information about reversibility, error behavior when the id is missing, or required scopes, which is insufficient for a deletion tool.

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% for the single required parameter. The phrase 'by id' only echoes the property name eventId and adds no format, source, or validation detail (e.g., where the id comes from, whether it accepts recurrence ids). The description does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb (delete) and resource (event) plus the keying mechanism (by id), so an agent immediately knows what the tool does. However, it does nothing to distinguish it from the sibling calendar_update_event or to clarify scope (single event vs. recurring series).

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as calendar_update_event. The agent must infer that this is the terminal removal operation from the verb alone.

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