Apply time scale

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it explains that despite readOnlyHint=false nothing in the project data is touched ('tasks, dates, assignments, calendars and baselines stay untouched'), and it discloses undo semantics including the edge case that re-applying an already-set level produces no undo step. This is exactly the behavioral context annotations cannot carry.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose first, then the non-destructive guarantee, then undo behavior. No filler, and the most decision-relevant fact (pure display property) is front-loaded.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and annotations plus the description together cover safety, idempotency and undo. Nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by framing level and unit+subdivision as alternative ways to set the same property and by tying subdivision to unit, which the schema only encodes structurally via oneOf/dependentRequired.

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?

States a specific verb ('Applies') and resource ('the time scale of the time axis'), and clarifies it is a display property. It does not name any sibling tool, but the resource is distinct enough (vs outline_apply, row_selection_apply, view_state_apply) that an agent can route to it correctly.

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 explains the two invocation modes (level, or unit plus subdivision) but never states when to prefer one over the other or when not to use the tool. Usage is implied rather than guided.

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