nworks_calendar_create

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It successfully discloses critical authentication requirements ('User OAuth 인증 필요 (calendar + calendar.read scope)') not found in the schema. However, it omits other behavioral traits like return values, idempotency, or conflict handling.

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?

Three efficient segments: purpose definition, usage triggers, and authentication requirements. Zero redundant words. Information is front-loaded with the core action in the first sentence.

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 9-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the 'create' semantics and auth prerequisites. Minor gap: does not describe what the tool returns (e.g., created event ID) or error conditions.

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 has 100% description coverage, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds value by contextualizing the OAuth scope requirements and implying user-context through the authentication note, slightly exceeding the baseline.

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?

Description explicitly states '캘린더 일정을 새로 만듭니다' (creates a new calendar event), providing specific verb and resource. The usage examples ('회의 잡아줘', '일정 등록해줘') clearly distinguish this creation tool from sibling operations like update, delete, or list.

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?

Provides explicit positive guidance with specific natural language trigger examples ('회의 잡아줘', '일정 등록해줘'). However, it lacks explicit negative guidance or sibling references (e.g., not mentioning to use nworks_calendar_update for modifications instead).

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