get_overdue_goals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the basic function ('retrieve overdue active goals') without any behavioral traits such as data limits, sorting, or side effects. As a read tool, it likely has no destructive effects, but the description does not confirm this or mention any prerequisites.

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 sentence, which is concise for a simple tool. However, it is in Japanese, which may limit usability for English-speaking agents, though the context provided by the user is English. The description is appropriately front-loaded with the core function.

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 two optional parameters with zero semantic coverage, the description provides only the bare minimum. It explains the purpose but lacks details on parameter meanings and usage context. The presence of sibling tools like get_goals suggests a need for clearer differentiation, which is missing.

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 0%, meaning the schema provides zero semantic context for 'team_id' and 'assigned_to'. The description does not explain what these parameters mean (e.g., team_id likely identifies a workspace, assigned_to likely filters by assignee), leaving the agent guessing about their usage.

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 it retrieves overdue active goals, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_goals (which likely retrieves all goals), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from get_goal_detail.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings like get_goals or get_goal_detail, nor any when-not-to-use information.

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