time_leap_year_checker

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It reveals operations and BCE support but does not fully explain parameter behavior (e.g., how to specify range or N). No mention of read-only nature or side effects.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with 'Leap Year Checker'. It efficiently conveys core information, though 'Menu ID' is somewhat extraneous.

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 no output schema and complexity of multiple operations, the description lacks details on operation parameter values, how to specify range/N, and return format. It defers to describe_tool, which is a gap.

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 has no descriptions or enums (0% coverage). The description lists operations but does not specify the exact string values for 'operation' (e.g., 'check', 'list', 'next') or how to convey range/N. The schema only has 'year' and 'operation', insufficient for all use 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 checks leap years under the Gregorian calendar, listing every leap year in a range, or finding the next N leap years. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, which are mostly conversions, crypto, text, etc.

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 specifies three operations (check, list in range, next N) and notes BCE support. It references describe_tool for full guidance but does not explicitly state when not to use it. However, the scope is clear.

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