create_event

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals only input formats (ISO 8601 dates and semicolon-separated attendees) but does not state side effects such as sending invitations, which calendar is used, whether an event ID is returned, or how online meeting/all-day flags behave.

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 three short sentences with no filler. Each sentence adds a distinct piece of information: the action, the date format, and the attendee format.

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 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is too thin to be contextually complete. It omits behavior around the creation (invitations, calendar selection) and does not document the optional parameters or expected return value.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for all 9 parameters, but it only clarifies 'start_datetime'/'end_datetime' formats and the 'attendees' separator. The remaining parameters (body_type, is_all_day, online_meeting, location_display_name, body) are left entirely to their titles and types.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Create a calendar event.' This clearly identifies the action and distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_event, cancel_event, and list_upcoming_events without needing further elaboration.

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?

Usage is only implied by the word 'create' and the resource name; an agent can infer this is for creating new events rather than updating or canceling existing ones. There are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or alternatives provided.

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