list_follow_up_radar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose two important traits — read-only and never sends anything — but does not cover permissions, pagination, ordering, or what a returned record contains.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a critical safety clarification. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 read-only list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers scope and safety adequately. But with no annotations and no output schema, it could say more about what a returned contact record includes, ordering, or pagination behavior.

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% for the single parameter 'within_days'. The description says 'within a chosen horizon', which vaguely implies the filter but gives no units, default, bounds, or explicit mapping to the 'within_days' parameter. It adds less precision than the schema's own default/min/max constraints.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('local contact records with a follow-up date'), and clearly scopes it to items due now or within a chosen horizon. It is distinct from all siblings, which are contact-context or mailbox/email tools, not follow-up radars.

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?

It implies when to use the tool by describing the target set: contacts with follow-up dates due now or in a chosen horizon. However, it gives no explicit alternatives, no when-not conditions, and no prerequisites or exclusions.

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