get_travel_dates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool calculates dates based on the current date and returns JSON, but lacks details on behavioral traits such as error handling, rate limits, or whether it's a read-only operation. It doesn't contradict annotations, but offers minimal behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

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 well-structured with clear sections for purpose, args, returns, and an example. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, with the core purpose stated first. Minor improvements could include removing redundant phrasing, but overall it's efficient and earns its place.

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, 2 parameters, and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is mostly complete. It covers the purpose, parameters, and return format adequately. However, it lacks usage guidelines and some behavioral details, preventing a perfect score.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It explains that 'days_from_now' is the 'Number of days from today for departure' and 'trip_length' is the 'Length of trip in days,' including default values and an example. This compensates well for the low schema coverage, though it doesn't cover all possible edge cases.

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's purpose: 'Calculate suggested travel dates based on current date. Helpful for planning future trips.' It specifies the verb ('calculate') and resource ('suggested travel dates'), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like date-range search tools, which is why it doesn't reach a 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions it's 'helpful for planning future trips,' but doesn't specify scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions compared to sibling tools like search_round_trip_flights or search_round_trips_in_date_range, which might overlap in functionality.

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