time_week_number

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It indicates the tool computes week numbers and converts them, but fails to explain the operation parameter's values, return format, or whether it is read-only. The mention of 'Menu ID' adds no behavioral value.

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) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the 'Menu ID: week_number' could be omitted or integrated more naturally, slightly reducing conciseness.

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 4 required parameters with no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It defers to describe_tool for full guidance, failing to provide standalone context for an agent to correctly invoke the 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 0%, yet the description provides no explanation of any parameter. It does not clarify what values 'operation' accepts (e.g., 'get', 'convert'), nor does it describe year, month, day. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 it is a 'Week Number Calculator' that can get ISO 8601, US, MMWR, and simple-calendar week numbers and convert week numbers to date ranges. This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling time tools like time_day_of_week.

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 mentions using describe_tool for full guidance but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not compare with alternatives like time_date_calculator or time_day_of_week, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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