get_users_plan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains calendar expansion per user, exclusion of weekends and holidays, and the effect of the breakdown parameter. It also describes the return structure including sorting and zero-plans handling.

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 concise and well-structured. It starts with the purpose, then a critical usage note, followed by parameter details in a list format. Every sentence adds value without 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 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and an existing output schema, the description provides complete context. It explains parameters, behavior, and return structure (by_user and by_project totals). The output schema may cover return values, but the description adds clarity.

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%, so the description fully compensates. It explains usernames as Jira logins, date format as YYYY-MM-DD inclusive, breakdown as 'day' for detailed output, and the return structure. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 it retrieves planned allocations for a group of users in Tempo Planner, per user. It uses specific verbs ('get') and resource ('users plan'), and the context of sibling tools (e.g., get_user_plan for a single user) helps distinguish it.

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?

Explicitly advises against calling per user: 'never call this once per user'. It explains that a single request covers all users in usernames for a date range. It could be improved by mentioning when to use the single-user alternative, but the guidance is clear.

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