weekly_plan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states the output is markdown with top goals and Friday review, but does not say whether it overwrites an existing plan, where it is stored, whether it requires auth, or what it returns; for a creation/mutation tool that is a meaningful gap.

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?

Single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the parenthetical efficiently names the plan components and output format. It is concise and well-structured for a short tool description.

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 zero annotation coverage, no output schema, and no schema descriptions for three parameters, the description is not complete enough: it omits storage/overwrite behavior, week/focus semantics, and output/return details. It conveys the core artifact but not enough for reliable invocation.

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%, so the description must explain all 3 parameters. It indirectly references goals ('top goals') but never explains week format, focus meaning, or the goals array constraints (1-5 items), leaving most parameter semantics undocumented.

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?

Names a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('this week's plan'), and states the expected artifacts ('top goals + Friday review') and format ('as markdown'). It is clear enough to separate from pipeline/investor/launch siblings by resource, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

Provides no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives among the sibling planning tools. At best the phrase 'this week's plan' implies a weekly planning context, but selection is left to inference.

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