schedule

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a vague sense of scope ('this fantasy week', 'ET') but does not clarify time window behavior, whether 'days' changes the ET window, or what the response contains.

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?

It is short, but the structure is a fragment of keywords rather than a front-loaded sentence. Every phrase gestures at content but none is clearly framed as purpose or behavior.

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 read-only schedule tool with no output schema and an undocumented 'days' parameter, the description is not complete enough for an agent to know the time horizon or output shape. It gestures at content areas but leaves key operational details unspecified.

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% for the single 'days' parameter. The description does not explain what 'days' controls, its default of 7, or how it relates to 'this fantasy week' and 'upcoming' – leaving an important ambiguity unresolved.

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 reads like a data label rather than a statement of action: 'Upcoming ET game days: NBA games, my players with games; NBA team game counts this fantasy week.' It implies a schedule lookup but does not specify a verb or clearly distinguish what the tool returns versus siblings like scoreboard or my_roster.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. An agent could confuse it with scoreboard, standings, or my_roster, and the description offers no exclusion or selection criteria.

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