update_event

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

Hints at partial update behavior with 'Pass only the fields you want to change' and mentions ISO 8601 for times. No annotations exist, so description carries some behavioral clues but lacks depth (e.g., idempotency, success/failure responses).

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. Front-loads the core action and key constraints.

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 9 parameters and many sibling tools, the description is too sparse. No mention of output structure (though output schema exists), no differentiation from 'respond_event' or 'get_event'. Agent may not know if updates are idempotent or if partial updates preserve other fields.

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 coverage is 0% and description only adds meaning for 'start' and 'end' (ISO 8601). Other 7 parameters like 'summary', 'description', 'attendees' are not explained, leaving the agent to infer from names alone.

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?

Description clearly states 'Update an existing event' with specific verb and resource. Differentiates from siblings like 'create_event' and 'delete_event'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'respond_event' or 'get_event'. Assumes understanding without context.

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