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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a useful behavioral detail – the default 7-day window – but says nothing about pagination, result caps, or what happens when nothing is scheduled.

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: what it returns first, when to use it second. No filler, no redundancy, front-loaded with the actionable scope.

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 read-only list tool with one optional param and no output schema, the description covers the default window, the return content (platform, time), and the use case. Missing only edge-case behavior (empty results, upper bound), which is minor here.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does disclose the default (7 days), which is the most important semantic for the optional 'days' parameter, but omits the range bounds (1–60) that the schema enforces. Partial compensation for a single optional param.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (posts scheduled to go out on social media) plus scope (coming days, default 7) and returned fields (platform, time). An agent can distinguish it from cancel_scheduled_post or schedule_post without opening schemas, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Gives concrete trigger phrasing: 'Use when asked what is scheduled, queued or going out soon.' That maps natural user intent to this tool. It does not name alternatives or exclusions (e.g., versus get_current_plan or get_plan_usage), which keeps it short of a 5.

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