get_recurring_items

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds useful context about the `matches` object being populated based on the requested range, which is beyond the schema. However, it doesn't disclose default behavior when no dates are provided (e.g., current month) or pagination/limits.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The core action and the key behavioral detail about `matches` are front-loaded. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 read-only list tool with 100% schema coverage, the description is mostly adequate. It could be improved by noting the default date range behavior (current month) and whether results are paginated, but these are minor gaps given the annotations and schema.

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. The description adds the key semantic that `matches` is populated based on the range, which helps understand start_date/end_date's purpose, but doesn't add much beyond that.

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 recurring items for a date range and mentions the `matches` object population. It distinguishes itself from get_single_recurring_item by being a list operation, though it doesn't explicitly name that 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?

The description implies usage for retrieving recurring items within a date range, and the schema clarifies start/end date requirements. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this over get_single_recurring_item or other list tools, nor does it mention exclusions.

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