get_floor_calendar

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the returned content: bills, sections, actions, and vote_id. However, it does not state read-only behavior, possible empty results, pagination, permissions, or limitations. For a read tool this is minimal but adequate.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the core definition and then linking to related tools. Every clause carries useful information with no filler.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the input source, the shape of results, and the downstream step to get_roll_call. It is nearly complete, though it could explicitly confirm that the result includes the bill numbers and session codes needed for that downstream call.

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%, but the description compensates by explaining that calendar_id comes from list_floor_calendars and serves as the key to the specific floor calendar. This adds real meaning beyond the raw integer type, though it could add more detail about format or validation.

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?

Opens with 'One floor calendar' and immediately defines the resource and scope: 'the bills up for action, by section, with the votes taken.' This is specific and distinguishes it from list_floor_calendars (which enumerates calendars) and get_roll_call (which retrieves a single vote).

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 establishes a clear call flow: calendar_id comes from list_floor_calendars, and vote_id plus bill number and session code are routed to get_roll_call. This gives an agent strong context on how this tool fits with siblings, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or contrast with all alternatives.

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