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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations, including the special cases where a landlord cannot end the tenancy by notice in England or must apply to a tribunal in Scotland. With an output schema present, it does not need to explain return values.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core computation and followed by the important jurisdictional exceptions. Every sentence contributes useful scope or behavioral information without repetition.

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 complexity of UK tenancy notice rules, the description clearly frames the tool's scope, parties, nations, and key legal exceptions. The input schema is fully documented and an output schema exists, so the description does not need to restate parameter or return details.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all seven parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description does not add further meaning about parameters such as rentDueDay, rentDueDate, or given. A baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it works out the least notice and earliest end date for ending a periodic private tenancy, across UK nations and for either party. It is clear what the tool computes, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as check_statutory_notice or check_rent_increase_notice.

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 gives clear usage context by specifying periodic private tenancies, all UK nations, and both tenant- and landlord-given notice. It also notes important jurisdictional limitations for England and Scotland. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool instead of a sibling tool.

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