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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Retrieve' implies a read operation, but the description does not mention authentication, rate limits, pagination, or what happens if no visits match. This is minimal transparency beyond the tool's basic purpose.

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 a single, focused sentence with no filler or redundant elaboration. It communicates the tool's purpose efficiently and is appropriately front-loaded.

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 tool with one optional parameter registered in the schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, there is no output schema and no mention of return structure or pagination, so the description does not fully cover what an agent might need when invoking the tool successfully.

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?

The input schema documents the single optional 'status' parameter with an example of valid values, so schema coverage is complete. The description adds no further meaning about the parameter, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 a specific action ('Retrieve') and resource ('scheduled visits and calendar appointments from the Jobber schedule'), making the tool's purpose understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling retrieval tools like jobber_get_jobs or jobber_get_quotes, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as jobber_get_jobs or jobber_search_clients. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage without any contextual selection criteria.

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