time_world_clock

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'live clocks' and 'snapshot mode' but does not explain the operation parameter or any behavioral traits like rate limits, risk of misuse, or what 'snapshot mode' entails.

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?

Description is brief (3 sentences) with no redundant information. It directly states the tool's purpose and mentions an extension via describe_tool. However, the internal 'Menu ID' and 'tool_id' could be streamlined.

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, no annotations, and 3 parameters with 0% coverage, the description should explain parameters and return format. It omits critical details like how to specify cities, what 'snapshot mode' means, and what the output contains.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description does not elaborate on the three required parameters (operation, iso, tzs). The meaning of 'operation' and 'iso' is unclear; only 'tzs' is hinted at via 'IANA time zones'. This fails to add value beyond the raw 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?

Description clearly states the tool provides live clocks for up to 12 cities in IANA time zones with offset, abbreviation, and DST status. It distinguishes itself from other time tools (like timezone converter) by focusing on multiple simultaneous clocks.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like convert_timestamp or time_timezone_converter. The only suggestion is to use describe_tool for more info, which is inadequate for selecting this tool.

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