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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world. Beyond those, the description adds genuine behavior: the 90-day cap, the default window, UTC handling, and the rule that supplying one end auto-extends the range 30 days.

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?

Two tight sentences with the date-range rule front-loaded and the single-end fallback immediately after. No filler.

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 paginated read-only list with fully described parameters and no output schema, the description covers scope, defaults, and limits. The return shape is covered by the cursor parameter's schema description.

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 each parameter is already documented. The description adds only the derived behavior when from or to is omitted, which is useful but narrow; it does not elaborate on cursor or job_id beyond 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 names a specific verb and resource ('List scheduled interviews') and scopes it to a date range. It is easy to distinguish from the create_/get_/search_ siblings, though it does not explicitly name an alternative listing tool.

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?

It supplies the operational context an agent needs (UTC dates, 90-day maximum, 30-day default either side of today), but it gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_candidates.

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