get_current_datetime

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states what the tool returns, not behavioral traits like performance, rate limits, or error handling. It mentions output formats but doesn't disclose if it's real-time, cached, or has any side effects, leaving gaps for a tool with potential time-sensitive 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It could be slightly more structured by explicitly noting the lack of parameters, but it avoids redundancy and wastes no words, earning a high score for brevity and clarity.

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 the tool's low complexity (0 params, no annotations, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It covers the purpose and output formats but lacks behavioral context (e.g., real-time vs. cached, error cases). Without annotations or output schema, more detail on return values or usage constraints would improve completeness.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of inputs. The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate here, but doesn't explicitly state 'no parameters required,' so it slightly underperforms. Baseline for 0 params is 4, as the description doesn't need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current date and time'), with explicit scope ('all available formats'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on datetime retrieval rather than analysis, conversion, generation, or validation operations.

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 implies usage context through 'all available formats,' suggesting this tool is for comprehensive datetime retrieval. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like convert_timezone or generate_random for timestamps, and provides no exclusions or prerequisites.

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