fa_get_scheduled_flights

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the date range constraint and optional filters but does not disclose other behaviors like pagination (though max_pages and cursor are in schema) or any side effects. Since annotations bear the main burden, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 sentence that conveys the core purpose concisely and includes the date format hint. Every part is necessary, and there is no redundancy. It is well-structured for quick understanding.

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 has 9 parameters, no output schema, and includes pagination, the description is somewhat minimal. It covers the basic purpose and filters but does not explain the return format or pagination behavior (though schema covers parameter details). An average score reflects adequate but not comprehensive completeness.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema; it merely lists some filters that are already described. Thus, it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 the tool retrieves airline-scheduled flights between two dates with optional filters. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like fa_get_flights or fa_search_flights, which could cause confusion. A more specific distinction would raise the score to 5.

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 provides the context of date range and filters but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as fa_get_airport_flights or fa_search_flights. It does not mention exclusions or when not to use it, limiting its usefulness for selection.

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