motion_schedules

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavior. It explains that the API returns all schedules with no filtering options, which is useful. However, it doesn't mention pagination, response structure, or other potential behaviors like rate limits.

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 concise sentences with no unnecessary words; the essential information is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence adds meaningful context about the lack of filtering.

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 description provides the core purpose, the data content, and the no-filtering behavior, which is sufficient for a simple list tool. However, it could be slightly more explicit about the response format since there is no output schema.

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?

The single parameter (operation) is fully described in the schema with a description and enum. The tool description does not add further parameter-level details, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline score is appropriate.

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 all schedules, specifying the contents (weekly working hours and time zones). It distinguishes itself from siblings like motion_search by explicitly noting there are no filtering options.

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 indicates this is for retrieving unfiltered schedule data, implying that any filtered schedule needs would require another tool. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, so it falls short of full guidance.

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