list_policy_deadlines

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It states the tool 'shows' data, implying read-only, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like auth needs, rate limits, or side effects. The lack of behavioral depth limits transparency.

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?

Description is concise, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and each sentence adds value. The rationale about deadlines vs. releases is included efficiently, and parameter descriptions are compact.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no required, output schema exists), the description covers usage context and parameter semantics adequately. It lacks return value explanation but the output schema handles that. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no pagination info) but overall complete for a list tool.

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 0% but description provides clear semantics for all three parameters: store ('apple'/'play'/'') , scan_date (ISO date), upcoming_only (boolean). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type/default information, helping agents understand valid inputs.

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?

Description clearly states the tool shows a dated policy calendar, with context about how store policies are schedule-based rather than release-based. This differentiates from sibling tools like check_api_declaration or explain_rejection, which serve different purposes.

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?

Description implies usage for checking policy requirements relative to dates, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. The context about deadlines vs. releases gives implicit guidance but lacks direct when/when-not instructions.

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