ghl_calendar_appointment_update

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds endpoint details and OAuth scopes, but does not disclose behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide, such as side effects, permissions required, or behavior for recurring appointments.

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 very short, with only two substantive lines beyond the title. It front-loads the purpose and includes technical details (endpoint, scopes) in a compact form, though the title repetition wastes a line.

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?

Despite 2 parameters with a complex nested body, the description fails to explain return values, how to handle recurring appointments, or provide high-level usage guidance. Given the tool's complexity and lack of output schema, this minimal description is insufficient for an AI agent to use it effectively.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (eventId and body) and all nested fields. The description adds no additional meaning or context about parameters; it relies entirely on the schema.

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 'Update Appointment' which identifies the action and resource, but it merely repeats the tool name. It does not differentiate this tool from sibling tools like ghl_calendar_appointment_create or ghl_calendar_appointment_get, making it ambiguous what specific aspects of an appointment are updatable.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any discussion of prerequisites, context, or scenarios where other calendar tools (e.g., create, delete) would be more appropriate.

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