Get Foreshadows Due

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly discloses the selection logic (chapter comparison and open status), and the word 'returns' implies a non-mutating read operation. However, it does not specify return format, pagination, or ordering, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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, efficient sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and core condition. No filler words or redundant information.

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 simple query tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the central filtering logic well. However, it omits clarification of project_id's role and what happens if current_chapter is omitted (it is optional in the schema). Minor gaps prevent a perfect score.

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%, so the description must compensate. It effectively explains the role of current_chapter ('当前章号') in the filter condition but says nothing about project_id, which is a required parameter. This partial coverage leaves a significant semantic gap for one parameter.

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 ('returns') and resource ('foreshadows') with a precise filtering condition: planned_payoff_chapter <= current_chapter and not closed. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_open_foreshadows, which likely lists all open foreshadows without the chapter-based due criterion.

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 when a user needs 'due' foreshadows requiring payoff, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as get_open_foreshadows or pay_off_foreshadow. No exclusions or alternative comparisons are provided.

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