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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it discloses output contents, time-zone handling, the today default, exclusion of cancelled visits, and the first-10-stops limit for the multi-stop link. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or mention permission requirements, which keeps it from a 5.

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 three tight sentences, front-loaded with the route output and followed by parameter selection and exclusions. Every sentence adds useful information without repetition.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values, yet it still summarizes them well. It covers the key behavioral details for a route-generation tool, though it leaves shop_id and read-only status implicit.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains person_id versus mine and the date default/time zone, but it never explains shop_id, and it does not clarify whether person_id and mine are mutually exclusive.

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 states a specific resource and output: one day's visits as a route, with ordered stops and map links. It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like schedule_list or schedule_events.

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 explains how to pick a worker and that the date defaults to today, but it gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as schedule_list or schedule_events. Usage is only implied by the route-oriented output.

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