Add calendar entry

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states that a new entry is created and an ID is returned, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., does it overwrite existing entries? What about validation errors?). Minimal transparency.

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 that front-load the purpose and key parameters. The inclusion of the endpoint ('/api/calendar/add') is extraneous for AI agent decision-making, but the description is otherwise concise and direct.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description mentions the return value (new item ID), which is helpful. However, for a mutation tool, it lacks details on error states (e.g., date validation) and does not clarify time handling (only dates specified). Adequate for a simple create operation.

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 100% with each parameter described. The description echoes the key parameters but adds little new meaning beyond the schema. The mention of 'optional end date and class' matches the schema but does not provide extra constraints or usage nuance.

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 verb 'Add' and resource 'calendar entry', specifying key parameters (name, start date, optional end date, class) and the return value (new item ID). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like hortusfox_add_task or hortusfox_add_inventory_item.

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 hortusfox_edit_calendar_entry for editing. The purpose is clear, but an agent would benefit from knowing that this tool is for creating new entries and not for updates.

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