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

Annotations already indicate read-only. The description adds behavioral context by detailing the return object shape and the team-scoped nature, and specifies the endpoint, without contradicting annotations.

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 that efficiently conveys purpose, return format, and endpoint with no wasted words.

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 tool with full schema and annotations, the description is complete: it explains what it returns and that it is team-scoped. No output schema is needed as the return is described inline.

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% so the schema fully documents parameters. The description adds minimal extra value by noting the payload is team-scoped and displaying the return format, but does not explain parameter values beyond what's in the schema.

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 uses the verb 'Get' with the specific resource 'NEXT scheduled shift' and includes the return format, distinguishing it from sibling tools like spike_list_on_calls that list all shifts.

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 implies usage when needing the next shift but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives like spike_get_on_call for current shift.

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