whats_on_the_schedule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the tool covers a date range with a default of 7 days, but it does not disclose return format or how date parameters interact.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences with no superfluous content. It front-loads example questions and then states the core functionality, with every sentence earning its place.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers the main purpose and usage context. However, the ambiguity around parameter interactions prevents it from being fully complete.

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%, and the description only mentions a default of 7 days, which relates to the 'days' parameter. It does not explain 'start_date' or 'end_date', or how they interact with 'days', leaving the agent without critical parameter semantics.

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 provides a jobs overview for a date range, with example questions it answers ('What's on the schedule?', 'How many jobs this week?'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_jobs by focusing on a schedule overview with a default 7-day period.

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 includes example queries that give clear usage context ('What's on the schedule?', 'How many jobs this week?'), indicating when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it lacks exclusionary guidance.

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