ghl_calendar_service_delete

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's main addition is OAuth scopes (calendars.write) and the endpoint URL. This adds moderate context beyond the annotations, but does not discuss irreversibility or side effects.

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 short and includes relevant endpoint details without being verbose. The first line repeats the title, but overall it's concise.

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 simple delete tool with one required parameter, the description covers the basic action and auth scope. However, it does not explain what the response looks like (e.g., success indicator) or whether the delete is permanent, which would be helpful given no output schema.

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 coverage is 100% with an example and description for serviceId. The description only repeats 'by ID' without adding new meaning, so it meets the baseline but adds no extra value.

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 clearly states 'Delete service by ID', which is a specific verb-resource combination. However, it does not distinguish between sibling tools like ghl_calendar_service_create, ghl_calendar_service_get, etc., so it lacks differentiation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or when not to use it. There is no mention of prerequisites, cascading effects, or confirmation steps.

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