Update Calendar Event

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

Annotations indicate mutability and idempotency, but the description adds crucial behaviors: user confirmation is recommended, and attendees receive update notifications. This goes beyond the structured metadata and helps the agent anticipate real-world effects.

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 brief yet covers purpose, usage, parameters, and behavior. It uses a clear structure with an introductory sentence, a bullet list of allowed keys, and an Args section. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. It already covers all necessary aspects: what the tool does, when to use it, what fields to update, and behavioral side effects (user confirmation, notifications). No gaps remain.

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?

The input schema lacks descriptions for all three parameters (0% coverage). The description compensates thoroughly by listing allowed update keys (subject, start, end, location, body) and providing brief explanations for event_id, updates, and account_id. This makes parameter usage clear.

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 updates an existing calendar event, listing specific properties like time, location, and attendees. This verb+resource combination uniquely identifies the tool among siblings (create, delete, get, list), making purpose unambiguous.

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 provides context for when to use the tool (to modify event details) and mentions side effects (notifications sent). However, it does not explicitly exclude scenarios like proposing new times or responding to events, though these are distinct operations handled by sibling tools.

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