chronica_timeline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Retrieves the timeline' without mentioning whether it is read-only, destructive, or has any side effects. It lacks details on pagination, rate limits, or authorization requirements, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 with a single sentence and a clear usage timing section. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and immediately useful usage examples. Slightly more efficient by avoiding redundancy would push to 5.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain what the timeline response looks like, how empty results are handled, or any constraints on parameter combinations. For a tool with moderate complexity, this is insufficient.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add extra semantic value beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb '取得' (retrieve) and the resource 'タイムライン' (timeline) for a specified period. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like chronica_search or chronica_save_entry by focusing on timeline retrieval by date range.

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 explicit usage examples such as '今日の振り返り' (today's recap) and 'この1週間の出来事をまとめて' (summarize this week's events), telling the agent when to invoke this tool. It does not mention when not to use, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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