list_schedule_v3_overrides

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the description adds no new behavioral context. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but given annotations, a 3 is appropriate.

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 extremely concise—6 lines total—with purpose first, then parameters, then return. Every sentence provides value; no wasted words.

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 the annotations cover safety, and an output schema exists, the description adequately covers what the tool does. It could mention the return structure explicitly, but the output schema compensates. Overall sufficient for a list operation.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains all three parameters: schedule_id as 'The ID of the v3 schedule', since/until as ISO 8601 time range with required. This adds meaningful context beyond schema, though examples would improve it further.

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 tool lists overrides for a v3 schedule within a time range, specifying the resource and action. It distinguishes from siblings like get_schedule_v3_override (single override) by including 'list' and time 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get_schedule_v3_override for a single override). Lacks when-not or comparative context.

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