list_calendar_work_orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and side effects. The description adds the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and date-range scoping but does not disclose other behavioral aspects like sorting, pagination, or result limitations. Given the annotations, this is adequate but not rich beyond them.

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 front-loaded sentence with no fluff or redundant information. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and date format, earning maximum structure points.

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?

Despite having annotations and an output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain two boolean parameters and provides no context about the tool's relationship to similar sibling tools like 'whats_on_the_schedule' or 'search_work_orders'. For a tool with four parameters and no schema descriptions, this leaves significant gaps in understanding.

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 must compensate. It only clarifies the date format for start_date and end_date. The boolean parameters 'only_workpool' and 'with_workpool' are completely unexplained, leaving substantial ambiguity about their meaning and effect.

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 ('List') with a clear resource ('calendar work orders') and a date range indicator. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'search_work_orders' or 'whats_on_the_schedule', so it lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or comparative context with sibling tools. The only inferred usage is via the date range parameters, but there is no explicit 'use this when' statement.

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