FDA Advisory Committee Calendar

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries most of the burden and delivers real context: coverage begins in late 2025, entries are the FDA's own listings, they are not mapped to stock tickers, and each includes a link to its FDA meeting page. It could still say more about result behavior such as pagination or sort beyond 'soonest first', which the schema covers.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the resource and source, then defaults, then limitations. Every sentence carries information an agent needs; no 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?

For a simple read-only calendar lookup with a fully described 3-parameter schema and no output schema, the description covers scope, defaults, source, and data limitations (late-2025 coverage, no ticker linkage). The remaining gap is minor: return shape details beyond 'each with a link to its FDA meeting page'.

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 schema already documents all three parameters, their formats, and defaults. The description restates the 90-day default and the date-range override, adding only slight reinforcement beyond the schema's 'defaults to 90 days after the start'.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (scheduled FDA advisory-committee meetings), plus the source (FDA.gov advisory-committee calendar). None of the 60+ siblings cover FDA regulatory events, and the description makes the domain unmistakable.

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?

Explicitly states the default window (next 90 days) and the condition for overriding it (pass a date range to look further ahead). It also draws the when-not boundary clearly: a forward-looking calendar, not a historical archive, so an agent knows not to use it for past meetings.

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