ghl_calendar_schedule_create

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (write operation) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the specific endpoint and OAuth scopes, which provide some behavioral context. However, it does not disclose other traits like error handling, idempotency, or side effects beyond creation. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise: two purposeful sentences plus essential endpoint and scope information. No superfluous words. Front-loaded with the action and resource.

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?

Given the nested parameter structure and lack of output schema, the description provides a clear overview and the schema covers input details. The addition of endpoint and OAuth scopes enhances completeness. Minor gap: no mention of return value or expected response format, but this is acceptable for a create tool when output schema is absent.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description merely lists parameter categories ('rules, timezone, location, user and calendar associations') without adding new semantic details beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states 'Create user availability schedule' and elaborates with 'Create new schedule with specified rules, timezone, location, user and calendar associations.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the tool name itself distinguishes it from sibling tools (e.g., update, delete, assign).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. Usage is implied by the tool name and context of sibling tools (create vs. update/delete/assign), but there is no guidance on prerequisites or decision criteria.

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