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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent mutation, but the description adds substantive behavior the annotations cannot convey: the valid start window (7 days back to 60 days ahead), the 30-day maximum duration, and the semantic equivalence between paused and skipped days. It omits what happens on invalid ranges or how pauses interact with already-logged entries.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and effect, then the constraints. Every clause carries information (use cases, skip equivalence, valid window) with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the annotations cover the safety profile. With the description supplying scope, window limits, and duration cap, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 from/to/reason are documented in the schema (including the 'same as from for one day' case). The description adds constraint meaning to from/to that the schema lacks: the allowed 7-days-back / 60-days-ahead start window and the 30-day maximum span.

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 (pauses) and resource (every topic) with explicit scope, and the title/description agree that the action applies across all topics rather than one. An agent can distinguish it from skip_day (single day) and archive_topic without opening the schema.

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?

Gives concrete use cases (holiday, illness) and relates the effect to skipping via 'Paused days count like skipped ones,' which implies the alternative semantics. It stops short of explicitly naming skip_day/unskip as alternatives or stating exclusions, so it is clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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