createParticipant

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral information. It states that the participant's calendar will be considered during scheduling, which implies a read/write side effect. It also lists supported providers (Google, Outlook, iCal). However, it does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the participant already exists. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: what the tool does, when to use it, and provider support. No wasted words; front-loaded with the main action.

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 5 parameters, one conditional, and no output schema or annotations. The description explains the prerequisite (must be called before other operations) and provider support. It lacks return value information and error handling details, but given the complexity, it is reasonably complete.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by noting that 'icalUrl is required when calendarProvider is "ical"', which is not conveyed in the individual parameter descriptions. This extra context justifies a 4.

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 tool's purpose: 'register a new person in MeetSync so their calendar can be considered during scheduling.' This provides a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from siblings like deleteParticipant and updateParticipant.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Must be called before a participant can appear in proposals, bookings, or availability queries.' It does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is clear and actionable.

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