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

With no annotations or output schema, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates the read-only 'List' nature and the date-window semantics, but does not state what the response contains, whether overdue items are excluded/included, or how days are counted. These are plausible ambiguities for an agent invoking the tool.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The action, targets, and key parameter are all present, with the default factored into the same concise clause.

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 one-parameter list operation, the description is nearly complete: it names the objects, the filter criterion, and the default. It lacks an explicit statement about return shape or behavior for past-due items, but this is a minor gap for a tool of this simplicity.

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 already documents the 'days' parameter and its default value, and the description repeats the same default without adding additional semantic detail. Parameter meaning is therefore adequately covered but not enriched beyond 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 a specific verb ('List') and names the exact resource types (operator evaluations, inspections, maintenance intervals) plus the temporal filter ('due within next N days'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like search_requirements, which implies searching rather than listing by due window.

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 gives clear usage context: use this tool when you need items due within a specified look-ahead windowyellow The default of 30 days helps an agent know what happens when no parameter is supplied. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the purpose is specific enough to route selection.

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