this_day_in_history

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the 'across years' scope but does not state read-only behavior, ordering, pagination, or the effect of the include_related parameter, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant information. It conveys the core purpose compactly and efficiently.

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 covers the main output concept but leaves out details about the optional include_related parameter, result ordering, or edge cases. The existence of an output schema mitigates the lack of return format explanation, but the tool is not fully self-contained for nuanced agent usage.

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 description adds valuable ranges for month (1-12) and day (1-31) beyond the bare integer schema types, which is helpful. However, it omits the optional include_related boolean entirely. Since schema coverage is 0%, this partial compensation is useful but incomplete.

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 returns every show played on a given month/day across all years. This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_setlist (single show) or search_shows (filtered search).

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 implies use for historical date-based lookups, and its behavior is distinct from other show-listing tools. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it lacks formal exclusion guidance.

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