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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does disclose two real behaviors beyond the schema: default status is 'open' and results are sorted soonest-first. However, it says nothing about the 500-row cap/pagination, what happens with 'all', or whether results are shop-scoped reads only.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose and ordering, then filters. No repetition or 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?

Output schema covers return values and the description covers purpose, ordering, default filter state and key filters. For a straightforward read-only list, this is nearly sufficient; the omission of the limit/pagination contract is the only material gap.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It usefully explains status semantics (including the non-obvious 'open' default) and due_before intent, but omits the limit parameter entirely and gives no format detail for the date/id filters.

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 ('List') plus resource ('service due dates') and scope ('for the shop') with the ordering rule ('soonest first'). It is unambiguous against the mutation siblings services_addDue/completeDue/cancelDue/updateDue.

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?

Implies usage through the filter framing ('to see what is coming up') but never states when to use this instead of other tools, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Adequate for the only list tool in the services family, but leaves the agent to infer intent.

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