get_expiring_soon

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the sorting order (ascending deadline) and the filtering logic, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention return format or potential edge cases. This is adequate for a simple get tool but lacks deeper behavioral disclosure.

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 concise sentences: purpose, sorting behavior, and usage examples. It is front-loaded with the primary function and contains no filler or redundancy.

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 filtered-list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it returns, how it sorts, and when to use it. It lacks explicit edge-case handling (e.g., no results) but is otherwise complete for the tool's complexity.

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 100%, with 'days' and 'cpv_codes' already well described. The tool description does not add any extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves notices with deadlines within N days, using the specific verb 'get' and resource 'notices'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on expiring deadlines, sorting by deadline ascending, which is not covered by summary/full/search tools.

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 provides concrete example queries ('what deadlines are next week', 'most urgent projects') and states the sorting behavior, establishing clear context for use. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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