Delimit Content Schedule

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

The description states 'Side effects: read-only' and names the underlying call, which would otherwise be strong transparency. However, the annotations declare readOnlyHint: false, directly contradicting the 'read-only' claim. Per the contradiction rule, this dimension must score 1.

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 structured with clear labeled sections, and every section serves a purpose: purpose, usage boundaries, sibling contrast, side effects, args, and returns. Although longer than a one-liner, none of it is filler and the key scoping information is front-loaded.

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 zero parameters and an output schema exists, the description still adds a preview of the returned dict and the underlying API. It covers when to use, when not to use, side effects, and invocation shape, so an agent has everything needed to call it correctly — apart from the read-only annotation mismatch already penalized.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter detail for the description to add. The description explicitly confirms 'Args: None', eliminating any ambiguity about invocation.

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 opens with 'View the upcoming content schedule' — a specific verb and resource — and explicitly scopes it to queued, pending, and recent items. It also differentiates itself from sibling tools by noting that delimit_content_queue mutates queue state while this reads the resulting schedule.

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?

It provides explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, naming delimit_content_publish and delimit_content_queue as the correct alternatives for publishing and queue management. The sibling contrast reinforces the read-vs-mutate boundary, so an agent is unlikely to select the wrong tool.

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