get_due_items

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read nature is covered. The description adds the 'open' status filter and the deadline range behavior, which is helpful, but it does not clarify what 'open' means or any other behavioral details beyond the annotation.

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?

One compact sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then states the deadline filter. There is no wordiness or redundant 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?

For a simple, optional-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description plus annotations and schema fully cover what an agent needs. The main concepts—open items, deadline today or earlier, and optional override—are all represented.

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 single parameter `by` is fully documented in the schema with format and default behavior, so the schema carries the parameter-semantics burden. The description adds no new parameter detail beyond restating the 'today or earlier' concept.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('open tasks/projects') and a precise filter ('deadline today or earlier'). This meaningfully distinguishes it from the sibling tool get_today_items, which appears to cover only today's items.

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 implies the tool is for overdue items plus items due today, which gives useful context. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over get_today_items or other listing tools, nor does it mention alternatives or exclusions.

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