Initiate Schedule Import

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

Annotations already idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds that only supplied fields are changed and returns the modified object, which is consistent with annotations. It also includes the HTTP method and endpoint, but no additional behavioral context like authentication requirements or error handling.

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, consisting of two sentences plus a list of required parameters and API endpoint. It is well-structured with information front-loaded, though the API details could be considered extraneous.

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?

With no output schema, the description states it returns the modified object but provides no details about the response structure. The endpoint and API version are given, but error scenarios and prerequisites are omitted. Adequate for a simple update operation but not exhaustive.

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 baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters (company_id, project_id, schedule_id, file), which adds clarity, but does not explain the optional 'locale' parameter beyond what's in the schema. No additional semantic details are provided.

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 it uploads a schedule file to import and updates existing scheduling records, with a specific verb ('Upload... to import') and resource ('scheduling records'). It distinguishes itself from a mere file upload by emphasizing the update behavior.

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 directs use to 'update an existing Scheduling records' with partial field updates, providing context on when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention any alternative tools (e.g., upload_schedule_file_v1_0), leaving some ambiguity.

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