Forward Calendar Event

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

The description discloses critical behaviors: immediate sending, irreversibility, validation, deduplication, recipient limit of 500, and the need for confirm=True. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) are consistent and the description adds substantial context beyond them.

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 concise and well-structured: a header line, a crucial warning, then a list of parameters with explanations. No extraneous information; every sentence adds value.

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 description covers purpose, usage, parameter details, behavioral warnings, errors, and return type. Given the tool's complexity (6 params, sending action) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete and self-sufficient.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining each parameter (e.g., 'to: Recipient email address(es)', 'confirm: Must be True to confirm sending'). It also mentions validation and limits. However, it does not detail format for account_id or event_id, missing some depth.

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 explicitly states 'Forward a calendar event to recipients,' clearly identifying the verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like email_forward (email) and calendar_respond_event (response), so an agent can differentiate it.

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 includes important usage instructions: user confirmation required, immediate sending, irreversibility, and recipient limits. It does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools, but the context and warning provide adequate guidance for when to use this tool.

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