get_pending_followups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It uses 'List' which suggests a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state that no state changes occur or address edge cases like timezone handling. The output schema likely documents return values, so missing that is acceptable.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then specifies the filtering criteria. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers the core behavior and parameter meaning for a simple read operation. The presence of an output schema covers return value details. However, it lacks explicit usage guidance or edge-case handling, though these are less critical for a straightforward listing tool.

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 a single parameter as_of_date with no description in the schema. The tool description explains that it is the date for which follow-ups due on or before that date are included, adding semantic meaning to the parameter.

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 uses the verb 'List' with a specific resource 'follow-ups' and clearly specifies the filter (due on or before the given date and not done). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_applications and add_followup.

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 for querying pending follow-ups, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions. The context of sibling tools (e.g., mark_followup_done) makes the purpose clear, but explicit guidance is missing.

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