important_dates_get

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, and the description adds practical behavioral detail: the default seven-day window, the effect of passing a larger window, and the meaning of passing 0. This goes beyond the annotation and helps the agent reason about results.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every subsequent sentence adds useful behavioral or parameter guidance. No wasted words or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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, single-parameter read-only listing tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential semantics: what is listed, the default horizon, and how to override it. Nothing important is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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%, but the description fully compensates by explaining the only parameter, within_days: its default, how to extend the window, and what 0 means. The parameter name clarifies the unit, so an agent can invoke it correctly.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List upcoming birthdays and important dates'. It also scopes the behavior to 'inside the weekly window', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like important_date_set and agenda_get without ambiguity.

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 usage context: it aligns with 'what's coming up this week' questions and the morning brief, and explains how to adjust the time horizon. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use it, but the context is strong enough for an agent to know when this tool fits.

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