get_hourly_productivity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only (though implied by 'get'), whether any data is cached or real-time, or if special permissions are needed. The lack of explicit behavioral traits is a gap.

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 compact: three sentences plus a parameter definition. The main purpose is stated first, followed by parameter clarification and a use-case sentence. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool with output schema, the description need not explain return values. The single parameter is well-documented. However, it omits any comparison to sibling tools or prerequisites. Given simplicity, it is largely complete but could explicitly contrast with get_activity_data or get_productivity_trend.

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 schema has 0% coverage with no description for date_str, but the description adds: 'Date to query - 'today', 'yesterday', or 'YYYY-MM-DD''. This provides valid formats and enumerations beyond the schema's type and default, fully compensating for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Get productivity breakdown by hour' and 'Shows when during the day you were most/least productive'. The verb 'Get' and resource 'productivity breakdown by hour' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_activity_data or get_productivity_trend by focusing on hourly granularity.

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 includes 'Useful for identifying peak productivity hours and scheduling deep work', which provides a clear use case. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, but the given context is sufficient for guidance.

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