create_event

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source for behavioral traits. It only states that the tool creates an event and uses ISO 8601 times, but omits details like authorization needs, rate limits, side effects, or error handling. This is insufficient for an 8-parameter creation tool.

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 short (two sentences) and to the point, but it sacrifices informativeness for brevity. It earns its place without fluff, but could be more structured to include key behavioral notes.

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 8 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain optional parameters, output structure, or edge cases like timezone handling or recurrence. It does not meet the needs of an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to start/end by specifying ISO 8601 format but leaves six other parameters (account, calendar, description, location, attendees) unexplained. The description adds marginal value beyond the schema.

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 creates a calendar event and specifies that times are ISO 8601. It is distinguished from sibling tools like update_event and delete_event by the verb 'create'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites are mentioned, and no exclusions are given. The description lacks context for effective decision-making.

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