get_dates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It adds value by defining parameter patterns but does not state that the tool is a read-only operation, mention rate limits, or describe side effects. The description partially compensates but lacks full transparency.

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 concise with no wasted words. It uses a clear 'Args' list, front-loads the purpose, and every sentence is necessary.

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 tool has no output schema, and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., format of dates, list vs. single entry). It also lacks a statement that it is a read operation. Given the complexity (3 params, no output schema), the description is incomplete.

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%, and the description fully compensates by specifying the exact format for from_date and to_date (YYYY-MM-DD) and listing all valid type values. This adds critical meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 'important dates for the state of Victoria, Australia', specifying the resource and scope. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and distinguishes itself from potential siblings by focusing on Victorian dates.

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 provides clear context for parameter usage (date formats and type options), making it easy for the agent to construct valid requests. However, it does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives or any constraints like required auth.

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