get_schedule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, indicating a safe, read-only operation. The description confirms 'Get' and returns schedule details, adding no contradictory information but also not adding extra behavioral context beyond what annotations provide.

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 extremely concise with a one-line purpose, followed by structured Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or filler.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, output schema exists, rich annotations), the description is complete. It explains what the tool retrieves and what the input is, without needing to detail return fields since an output schema is present.

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 description explains the single parameter 'schedule_id: The ID of the schedule to retrieve', adding meaning beyond the schema which only specifies type and required status. With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well, though the parameter is straightforward.

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 a specific schedule by ID', which is a specific verb ('get') and resource ('schedule'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_schedules (retrieve all schedules) and get_schedule_users (different resource).

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 usage for retrieving a single schedule by ID, but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like list_schedules or provide conditions or exclusions. The context is clear but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or what alternatives exist.

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