kreta_consulting_hours

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description is consistent with those annotations and adds the date-range constraint, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, limit behavior, or how the listing is ordered.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler and is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it is so terse that it omits useful parameter and usage detail that would help an agent invoke it correctly.

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 four parameters, 0% schema description coverage, and no parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete for safe invocation. The output schema likely covers return values, but the meaning of 'child', the role of 'limit', and the expected date format are absent, and no distinction from the detail sibling is provided.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining parameters. It only clarifies that there is a date range, which maps to start_date and end_date, but leaves 'child' and 'limit' unexplained and does not specify date formats or accepted values.

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 a retrieval action ('lekérése') on a specific resource ('Fogadóórák' consulting hours) scoped to a date range. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling 'kreta_consulting_hour_detail', so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'kreta_consulting_hour_detail'. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or contextual cues beyond the implicit fact that it operates on a date range.

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