Get Maintenance Windows

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'Returns' which implies a read-only operation, but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it mention pagination, ordering, or other behaviors beyond returning all windows.

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 sentence that is direct and concise. It front-loads the core purpose without any redundant words or 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?

For a simple tool with no parameters and an output schema present, the description adequately covers its function. It could mention that this is a read-only list operation, but the term 'Returns' largely conveys that. The tool's simplicity means less detail is required.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to explain parameters because there are none, and the input schema already reflects this fully.

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 a specific verb 'Returns' and identifies the resource 'all scheduled maintenance windows defined in Uptime Kuma'. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling 'createMaintenance' tool, which creates rather than retrieves.

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 the tool is for listing maintenance windows, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions. The use case is obvious but not articulated.

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