calendar_delete_event

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It thoroughly discloses irreversibility (no trash), the confirm flag's dry-run behavior, and the refusal of recurring series without confirmSeries. This is exemplary transparency for a destructive operation.

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 sentences, with the most critical warning front-loaded. The second sentence is dense but packs essential behavior. No filler; every clause adds value. Slightly long but justified.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers the core action, the confirm mechanism, the recurring series edge case, and even hints at the return value when not confirmed. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema for confirm (explaining it must be true to delete and that false returns the event) and confirmSeries (explaining it removes every occurrence). This elevates it above 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Delete an event') and the resource. It distinguishes from siblings like calendar_update_event and calendar_respond_to_event by focusing on deletion. The additional context about irreversibility and confirm flags further clarifies its specific role.

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 implies when to use it (to delete an event) and provides key usage conditions: the need for confirm:true and confirmSeries for recurring events. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or say 'use this when...', the context makes the intended use clear.

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