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

The annotations already declare `readOnlyHint: true` and `openWorldHint: true`, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the title and name, such as what a schedule contains, permissions, error behavior, or how the lookup is scoped.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The core action and resource appear immediately.

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?

This is a simple single-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering read-only and open-world behavior. However, the description does not help the agent understand how the id is obtained or how this differs from listing working-day schedules.

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%, and the only parameter is documented in the schema as "The working-day schedule id." The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 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 gives a specific verb, "Get," and a specific resource, "working-day schedule," and the singular "one" distinguishes it from the sibling list operation. It does not explicitly name the list alternative, but the cardinality contrast is clear enough for an agent to distinguish them.

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 does not explain when to use this tool instead of `talenox_list_working_days`, nor does it say that the caller must already know the schedule id. It implies retrieval by id only through the schema, not through guidance in the description.

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