get_week_plan

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

No annotations exist, so the description fully covers behavioral traits. It discloses read-only nature, return format (array of day objects with date and list), omission of days without entries, and the meaning of an empty array. Could mention idempotency or error handling but is already very helpful.

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 and front-loaded with the main purpose, then return format, then disambiguation. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or misleading information.

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?

Without an output schema, the description adequately describes the return format and edge cases (empty array). It provides a complete picture for a read operation, though it could optionally mention error responses. Overall, it balances depth and brevity well.

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 100%, so the description does not need to add much about parameters. It briefly mentions the return format but does not elaborate on parameters beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable given high schema coverage.

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 meal-plan entries between two dates, is read-only, and distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'update_week_plan_day' by specifying that one is for reading and the other for setting/clearing a single day.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (reading meal-plan entries for a date range) and when to use the alternative 'update_week_plan_day' for setting/clearing a single day. Also explains that an empty response means no entries, not an invalid range.

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