calendar_remove

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the key behavior: this is destructive and gated behind confirm=true, otherwise it degrades to a report-only preview. It omits permissions/auth requirements and the irreversibility/effect on recurring events, which would round it out.

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, zero waste, with the destructive nature and confirm gate front-loaded immediately after the purpose statement. Nothing redundant.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential safety behavior (confirm gate, preview fallback) and the schema fully documents parameters. Auth/permission expectations and side effects (recurrence handling, notification of attendees) are the notable remaining gaps.

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 the schema already documents all five parameters including confirm, dry_run, and eventkit_id. The description only restates event_id ('by id') and confirm, adding no syntax or meaning beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a calendar event by id'), which naturally separates it from calendar_edit, calendar_add, and calendar_search. It does not explicitly name a sibling to differentiate against, but the destructive verb is 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?

Gives an explicit call-time rule: confirm=true is required, and without it the call only previews. That tells the agent how to invoke it safely, though it does not point to alternatives (e.g., calendar_edit) for modifying rather than removing an event.

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