delete_event

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits on its own, but it only says 'delete'. It fails to state whether deletion is permanent, whether it cascades to tickets, teams, or other associated data, whether permissions are required, or whether the action is reversible. This is a significant gap for a destructive mutation 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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. It contains zero filler or redundant details, making it easy to parse at a glance.

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 tool's destructive nature and the complete absence of annotations, the description omits critical context about permanence, side effects, and permission requirements. An output schema exists, but a one-sentence description is insufficient for a delete operation that interacts with related data.

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 description adds little beyond the schema: 'by ID' merely restates that event_id identifies the event. With 0% schema description coverage, it doesn't clarify ID format, constraints, or how to obtain it. However, for a simple string ID, this minimal mapping is acceptable, hence a mid-range score.

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 'Delete an event by ID' states a specific verb and resource, making the tool's intent clear. It differentiates itself from read and update operations like get_event and update_event, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling cancel_event, leaving some ambiguity about how deletion differs from canceling an 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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use delete_event versus alternatives such as cancel_event or unpublish_event. There is no mention of prerequisites, whether deletion is permanent, or which scenarios call for this tool over others, so agents receive no decision support.

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