Chores Overdue Tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that the tool returns only filtered chores, which is a behavioral trait, but it does not explicitly confirm it is a read-only operation or mention any potential side effects (though none are expected). It also omits details like sorting, pagination, or field completeness, which could be relevant for an agent. It provides basic transparency but not comprehensive.

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 exceptionally concise: two sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a precise clarification. Every word earns its place, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

For a simple parameterless query tool, the description provides the essential information: what it returns and the exact filter condition. The presence of an output schema means return structure need not be explained in the description. It lacks only minor optional details like sorting order or whether all chore fields are included, but these are not critical for correct 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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. Per the baseline for 0 parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate because there are no parameter semantics to explain; the description correctly avoids any irrelevant parameter details.

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 states a specific action (List) on a specific resource (chores) with a clear filter (past scheduled execution time). It clearly distinguishes this from a general chores_list_tool by specifying the overdue criterion, and the second sentence reinforces the exact condition (next execution time in the past). This leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 implicitly tells the agent when to use this tool (when overdue chores are needed), but it does not explicitly contrast it with siblings like chores_list_tool or mention when not to use it. There is no direct guidance on alternatives or exclusions, so the usage context is implied rather than stated.

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