delete_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral transparency burden. It does disclose a meaningful behavior—no cancellation notification is sent to attendees—which goes beyond the verb 'delete.' However, it does not mention whether the deletion is permanent, whether special permissions are required, or what other side effects might occur.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Every word contributes meaning, and the most important distinguishing behavior is placed upfront.

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 simple two-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides the essential differentiator from cancel_event but omits operational details such as irreversibility, permission requirements, and return behavior. It is minimally sufficient but leaves several practical details for the agent to infer.

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 for the undocumented parameters. It mentions 'an event' but never explains event_id or mailbox, their formats, or their roles. Without this, the agent gains no additional parameter meaning beyond what the raw schema field names provide.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('an event'), plus the key qualifier 'without sending a cancellation to attendees,' which clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like cancel_event. An agent can immediately understand what this tool does and how it differs from related operations.

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 phrase 'without sending a cancellation to attendees' implies that a tool exists for canceling with notifications, and it tells the agent when to choose this tool over that alternative. However, it never explicitly names cancel_event or provides explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance, leaving some inference to the agent.

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