delete_calendar_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It conveys only that the operation is destructive via the verb 删除, but says nothing about permanence, whether attendees are notified, recurrence handling, required permissions, or error behavior for an invalid ID.

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 short lines, front-loaded with the action followed by the parameter. Nothing is padded, though the '参数:' block is largely a restatement of a one-field schema and earns limited extra value.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the action and the parameter but omits the behavioral context (permissions, irreversibility, effect on recurring events) an agent needs before invoking a delete. Adequate but with clear 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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single parameter. It does gloss event_id as the unique ID of the event to delete, adding meaning beyond the schema's bare 'type: string', but it gives no format, source, or validation detail for that ID.

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+resource (删除日历事件 / delete calendar event), which cleanly distinguishes it from the sibling delete_task and delete_email tools. Clear purpose, though it does not proactively name any alternative. It relies on the resource noun alone for differentiation, which is adequate here.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus update_calendar_event, list_calendar_events, or other delete tools, nor any prerequisites (permissions, required ownership). Usage must be inferred entirely from the name and the single parameter.

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