datetime_date_diff

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it does not specify the return value (e.g., signed difference, absolute), accepted date formats, or whether time components are considered. This is insufficient for an agent to reliably use the tool.

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, but it lacks structure and does not earn its place by providing necessary details. It is not well-structured for a tool that needs parameter and behavioral context.

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 0% schema description coverage and no output schema, the description should be more comprehensive to compensate. It fails to provide enough context for an agent to use the tool effectively, especially among multiple sibling date tools.

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 coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain the roles of date1 and date2, nor their expected format, leaving the agent without essential information to correctly invoke the tool.

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 verb 'calculate' and the resource 'difference between two dates'. It is specific enough to understand the tool's purpose, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'datetime_business_days' which also calculates date differences but for business days.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any contextual hints such as expected date formats or whether the difference is absolute or signed.

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