get_productivity_summary_for_time_range

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It provides no information about side effects, required permissions, data volume, or how the time range is computed. The phrase 'comprehensive productivity summary' is vague and does not reveal behavioral traits.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it omits important context about the tool's function. It is not overly verbose, but fails to earn its place with meaningful detail beyond 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?

While the output schema exists to explain return values, the description does not mention what the summary includes (e.g., metrics, time tracking data) or any limitations. For a tool with four parameters and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete.

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 high (75%) and parameter descriptions in the schema are detailed with examples. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 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 uses 'Get a comprehensive productivity summary' which clearly indicates a retrieval operation on a summary resource. It specifies a time range, but does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like get_daily_productivity_overview or time_tracking_summary, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage without explicit direction.

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