Search Policy Windows

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

Annotations already provide read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive hints. The description adds valuable context about case-insensitive recurrence filtering and coercion behavior, which goes beyond annotations. However, it does not discuss potential limitations or response format.

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 concise (two sentences), front-loaded with the main purpose and filtering options, and includes a technical nuance in the second sentence. No extraneous information.

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 9 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main functionality and a behavioral detail but misses several parameters (org_uuid, sort, direction) and does not note that all params are optional. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 explains group_uuids, statuses, recurrences, and pagination, but omits org_uuid, sort, and direction. It adds meaning beyond the schema for covered params but is incomplete.

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 searches and lists maintenance/exclusion windows, specifying the resource (policy windows) and scope (Automox organization). It distinguishes from siblings like get_policy_window (single retrieval) by emphasizing listing and filtering capabilities.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_policy_window or other search tools. The description implies usage for filtered searches but does not explicitly state context or exclusions.

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