Get Week Ahead

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent, so the 'Read-only' sentence is largely redundant but consistent. The description earns credit for disclosing composition behavior — exactly which feeds get merged into the response — which annotations cannot express. It omits any note on volume, latency, or what happens when the window contains nothing.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste, and the payload contents are front-loaded ahead of the merge/datasource note. Every clause adds information an agent can act on.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must convey what comes back — and it does list the four returned buckets, which is enough to plan consumption. It does not describe the shape of each bucket (counts vs. item arrays) or ordering, leaving a modest gap for a multi-source aggregation 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (the sole 'days' parameter is documented, default 7), so the schema carries the semantics and a baseline 3 applies. The description's 'coming week' framing loosely corroborates the 7-day default but adds no detail on how a custom 'days' value changes the merged window.

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?

States a specific verb and a specific composite resource (the coming week: due items, missing submissions, unread announcements, unread inbox count). The phrase 'in one call' plus the enumeration of merged feeds makes it distinguishable from siblings like list_todo, list_upcoming_events, list_announcements and get_unread_conversation_count at a glance.

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 'in one call' framing plus 'Merges the Planner feed, missing submissions, calendar and inbox' tells the agent this is the aggregate/shortcut path rather than the per-source siblings. It stops short of naming which sibling to use instead when the agent needs a narrower or longer-range query, so there is clear context but no explicit exclusions.

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