check_deadlines

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It usefully explains that froide stores no 'deadline expired' flag and that the value is computed from due_date against the current time, matching frontend behavior. This gives an agent useful context about why the result set is time-dependent.

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 short and front-loaded with the essential meaning. The only minor issue is the unexplained 'YELLOW' label, which adds slight ambiguity but does not bloat the text.

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 that the tool takes no parameters and has no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete: it states what the tool returns and explains the deadline computation. It could mention return format or pagination, but those are not essential for a zero-argument listing tool.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline of 4 applies because the description does not need to compensate for any schema gaps.

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 identifies the tool's result as the user's open requests whose statutory deadline has passed, which distinguishes it from list_my_requests and get_request. It lacks an explicit verb like 'lists' or 'returns', but the meaning is unambiguous and matches the tool name.

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 usage is implied: use this when you need to see open requests with expired statutory deadlines. However, it does not explicitly compare with sibling tools such as list_my_requests or state when not to use it.

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