get_user_plan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behavioral traits: the date range is inclusive, weekends and holidays are excluded using Tempo's calendar, and the breakdown parameter controls output detail. It does not mention read-only nature or authentication, but the core behavior is well-explained.

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 well-structured with an introductory sentence, a bullet list for arguments, and a note on return structure. It is efficient but slightly longer than necessary; however, every sentence adds value. No redundancy.

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 tool's moderate complexity (date range, calendar, breakdown), the description covers all functional aspects. An output schema exists, and the description provides a high-level overview of return fields (plans, by_project, optionally by_day). No obvious gaps for an agent to misuse the 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate fully. It provides detailed semantics for all four parameters: username (Jira login), date_from and date_to (inclusive YYYY-MM-DD format), and breakdown (pass 'day' for daily breakdown). This adds essential meaning beyond the schema titles.

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 fetches a user's plan allocations over a date range, answering a specific question. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_users_plan' by focusing on a single user, and the verb 'get' combined with the resource 'user_plan' is precise.

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 implicitly explains when to use the tool (to retrieve a user's planned hours for projects within a range) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or when alternatives like 'get_users_plan' might be better. Usage context is clear but lacks exclusions or comparisons.

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