planner_plans

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

Discloses internal behavior (enumerates groups via /me/memberOf, aggregates plans), permission requirements, and read-only nature. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and description aligns and adds context (fields returned, OAuth app specifics). No contradiction.

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?

Four sentences, each serving a purpose: main action, two behavioral cases, output fields. Efficient but could be slightly tighter (e.g., combine last two sentences).

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?

Covers main behaviors, output fields, and permission context. Has output schema (not shown). Missing details like pagination behavior (limit implies pagination), error handling, or rate limits, but adequate for a list tool with annotations.

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?

group_id parameter is well-explained (function with vs without). However, limit parameter (default 50) is not described at all, leaving its purpose vague. Schema coverage is 0%, so description partially compensates but not fully.

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?

Clear verb 'List' on resource 'Microsoft Planner plans'. Differentiates behavior with and without group_id. Distinct from sibling tools like planner_plan_get (single plan).

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 describes when to use each parameter (without group_id aggregates across groups, with group_id lists within one). Mentions required permission (Group.Read.All) and that it's pre-granted. However, does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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