Create Calendar Event

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that no invitations or reminders are sent, that calendar.write is required, and how to reconcile an uncertain result by UID lookup without repeating the create. These are high-value operational details for a non-idempotent, open-world mutation.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core behavior and followed by the permission and reconciliation rules. Every sentence carries useful information, though the final sentence is dense and could be split for readability.

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?

Complete for a create tool with a rich input schema, an output schema, and annotations. The description covers the non-obvious behavioral risks: missing invitations, the write permission, and safe handling of uncertain creates.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the UID reconciliation rule but adds no new syntax or meaning beyond the schema text, making the baseline score appropriate.

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 and resource: save an event, with the key qualifier that no invitations or email reminders are sent. That distinguishes it from messaging and invitation flows, but it does not explicitly distinguish creation from the sibling update_calendar_event tool.

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?

Gives a clear usage condition (events without invitations or email reminders) and a prerequisite (calendar.write). It does not explicitly name an alternative sibling for the invitation case or say when to use update instead, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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