due_soon

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. Beyond implying a read of 'Active loans', it says nothing about whether overdue items are included, result ordering, caps, or scope (branch/patron), all of which matter for an unannotated query tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the scope condition and the default up front; nothing wasted. It is arguably too tight, since the same brevity creates the boundary ambiguity with list_overdue.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and a single optional parameter keeps the surface small. Still, for a tool in a family with list_loans and list_overdue, the definition lacks the one or two boundary facts an agent needs to choose correctly.

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 only parameter has just a type and default. The description does add real meaning by defining the window as 'within days of today' plus the default of 7, but it leaves ambiguous whether the direction is forward-only and whether 0 includes today's due items.

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 resource ('Active loans') and a precise scope condition ('due within days of today, default 7'), which reads as a filtered listing. It is distinguishable from list_loans and list_overdue by implication, but it never names those siblings or states the boundary explicitly.

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 window phrasing implies the use case (upcoming due dates), so an agent can guess when to pick this over list_loans. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or pointer to list_overdue for already-overdue items, leaving the main routing decision to inference.

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