get_journal

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the return is an outline with screenshots, but says nothing about behavior for a day with no journal, page size, or how image inclusion affects the payload.

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?

Very short and front-loaded: the resource description comes first, then a compact format note. The dangling 'with its screenshots' fragment is slightly awkward but costs little.

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?

Two params, no output schema, and no annotations-driven explanation of return structure. It states the date format but that alone is thin; return shape, error cases and image behavior are all unaddressed for a tool whose entire value is the shape of what it returns.

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?

With 0% schema coverage the description must carry the load; it documents the date parameter's accepted formats ('today', 'yesterday', YYYY-MM-DD), which the schema does not. However, include_images is never explained beyond the oblique 'with its screenshots' phrase, leaving the second parameter's semantics implicit.

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?

States a specific resource (the journal page of one day) and its return shape (an outline plus screenshots), which distinguishes it from get_page and get_block. It never explicitly names a sibling it is not, so it falls short of a 5.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives like get_page or search. The only conditional context is the accepted date values, which is parameter syntax rather than usage guidance.

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