list_periodic_notices

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not disclose output format, pagination, ordering, or any other operational details. While it does not contradict the annotation, it provides no additional transparency about the tool's behavior.

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, short sentence that conveys the core action without any unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and concise, though somewhat minimal, it earns its place as a clear, non-redundant statement.

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?

Despite having no parameters and an output schema, the description fails to provide enough context. It does not clarify what 'periodic notices' are or differentiate from other notice list tools, leaving the agent without a full understanding of when this tool is relevant.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100% (everything is documented). The description does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline score of 4 is appropriate since no parameter guidance is required.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List periodic notices'. It distinguishes the action from mutation tools but does not differentiate it from sibling tools like 'list_realtime_notices' or 'list_expiry_notices', relying solely on the name for disambiguation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or situations where 'list_periodic_notices' would be preferred over similar list tools, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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