calendar_import_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses one key behavior: 'adds a private copy', but omits other details like permissions, idempotency, duplicate handling, or error scenarios. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 a single, well-structured sentence with no redundant information. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and a key behavioral trait.

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 7 parameters, 4 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It lacks information about return value (e.g., imported event ID), default calendarId, and handling of existing events. The schema covers parameter descriptions, but context beyond that is missing.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds overall context (import, private copy, iCalUID) but does not provide new parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already offers.

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 action 'Import an event', the target resource 'Google Calendar', and a distinguishing detail 'adds a private copy using iCalUID'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like calendar_create_event or calendar_quick_add.

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 implies use when you have an iCalUID and want to create a private copy, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over siblings like calendar_create_event or calendar_update_event. No 'when not to use' or alternative references.

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