Get current weekly schedule

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

The description adds behavioral details beyond the annotations, such as the required permission scope and that it returns scheduled minutes per weekday. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description reinforces and supplements without contradiction.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences covering purpose, return content, permission scope, and read-only nature. Every word adds value, and no information is wasted.

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?

The description adequately explains the return format (scheduled minutes per weekday) and required scope. It lacks details on error handling or behavior for invalid inputs, but for a simple read operation with strong annotations, it is mostly 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?

The input schema has full description coverage (100%) for the single parameter person_id. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the score is at the baseline of 3.

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 retrieves the employee's current weekly working schedule with scheduled minutes per weekday. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_day_calendar and get_month_calendar by specifying the weekly scope.

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 indicates the required permission scope (weekly.schedules:read) and marks the tool as READ-ONLY, providing context for safe usage. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or compare it to alternative calendar endpoints.

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