Block calendar slot

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

Annotations already mark this as a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-idempotent. The description adds the key outcome (prevents booking) but does not disclose side effects such as what happens to existing appointments, permission requirements, or whether the block can be removed. With annotations present, this is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, example in parentheses, and a format note. No filler.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the core intent but leaves ambiguities around calendar selection defaults, overlap behavior, and return value. Combined with openWorldHint=true, an agent might not fully anticipate side effects. However, required parameters are clear.

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 83%, so the schema documents most parameters. The description reinforces that startTime/endTime are ISO 8601 but adds no information beyond the schema. It does not clarify the optional calendarId behavior or the undocumented assignedUserId.

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 action (block) on a specific resource (calendar time) with the outcome (can't be booked) and an example use case. This clearly distinguishes it from appointment creation tools among siblings.

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 implies a use case (blocking off time for filming/edit days) but does not explicitly compare it to sibling tools like ghl_create_appointment or ghl_get_free_slots. There is no 'when not to use' guidance.

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