gift_keeper_upcoming

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes further by disclosing the shape of the returned data — who the occasion is for, gift-chosen status, budget, and spend — which is genuinely useful since no output schema exists. It stops short of mentioning sorting, result caps, or date/timezone handling.

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?

A single well-formed sentence that front-loads the resource and then lists the payload fields. Nothing is padded, though the parenthetical enumeration of occasion types is slightly list-heavy for the amount of information conveyed.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly compensates by describing the return contents, and the two parameters are fully specified in the schema. Minor gaps remain around ordering, result count, and how 'upcoming' is bounded by default, but an agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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?

Both parameters (person, withinDays) are fully documented in the schema at 100% coverage, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no filtering or format detail beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific resource (upcoming occasions) and enumerates the occasion types it covers (birthdays, anniversaries, holidays, custom dates), which the agent can map to the Gift Keeper domain. It is clearly distinct from gift_keeper_people, though it never uses an explicit verb like 'list' or 'retrieve' and does not directly contrast itself with any sibling.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for looking ahead at coming occasions, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative (e.g. gift_keeper_people) is named for the person-centric case.

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