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

With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose critical behavioral details. It does not specify whether weekends or public holidays are excluded, what the exact definition of 'business days' is, how the output is formatted, or whether the operation is reversible. These gaps leave the agent uncertain about the tool's behavior.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. While it could benefit from more structure (e.g., grouping purpose and behavior), its brevity is efficient for a simple tool and fits the expected format.

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 tool's low complexity and the presence of a detailed schema and output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks an explanation of the return value format, the exclusion of weekends/holidays, and any edge cases (e.g., negative days), making it incomplete for full contextual understanding.

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 provides clear descriptions for both parameters ('Start date (YYYY-MM-DD)' and 'Business days to add'), covering 100% of the parameters. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond what is already in the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Add business days to a date' clearly states the action (add) and resource (business days to a date). It is specific and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'business_days' (which likely calculates the number of business days between dates) and 'add_time' (which adds calendar time).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'add_time' for adding calendar days or 'business_days' for calculating differences. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or context that would help an agent decide which tool to invoke.

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