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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose three behavioral traits: the 90-day source calendar, UTC-based start-of-window semantics, and a coverage caveat that only desk-verified figures are included. It says nothing about return shape per event, pagination beyond 'limit', or freshness/caching, which are real gaps for a feed tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 sentences, zero waste, with the core action and window front-loaded and the data-quality caveat placed second. Nothing is repeated from the schema.

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?

There is no output schema and the description never indicates what an unlock event contains (token, date, amount, supply percentage), so an agent cannot reason about downstream use. For a data-retrieval tool whose return contents are entirely unspecified, the definition under-delivers despite the decent scoping information.

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%, and both parameters carry bounds, defaults and descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description only weakly reinforces days_ahead via '90-day unlock calendar' and adds no meaning for limit beyond what the schema states.

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 and resource ('List dated token unlock events') plus the data source and ordering ('soonest first'), which is enough detail to picture the output. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the overlapping siblings get_token_unlocks and get_unlock_calendar, so sibling differentiation is left to the reader.

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?

'Starting today (UTC)' implies a forward-looking window and that past events are excluded, which is useful implied guidance. However, nothing says when to choose this over get_unlock_calendar or get_token_unlocks, and the 1-90 day horizon is only inferable from the schema.

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