evaluate_homework_deadlines

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does disclose one genuinely important trait: returning alerts does not deliver notifications, so the call has no messaging side effect. It does not state whether the evaluation itself mutates state, what the result contains, or how now_iso/threshold_hours affect behavior.

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 short sentences with no filler, but the first is wasted on a vague, mismatched phrase. The more useful caveat about notifications is buried second rather than front-loaded.

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 not be described, but with no annotations and zero parameter documentation the description leaves the agent without the semantics of the threshold or reference time needed to call it 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 description coverage is 0% across three parameters, so the description must compensate and does not – items, now_iso, and threshold_hours are never explained. "Observed inventory" only loosely hints that items is the inventory payload, leaving defaults and formats undocumented.

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?

"Evaluate observed inventory" uses a generic verb with a resource that does not match the tool name at all – nothing in the description mentions homework, deadlines, or thresholds. An agent reading only this text could not tell what is being evaluated nor distinguish it from siblings like export_deadlines_ics.

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?

No statement of when to call it, what prerequisites exist, or which sibling to use instead. The second sentence implies a downstream step (sending notifications) still needs a separate tool, which is minimal usage context but not guidance on selection.

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