schedule_draft_plan

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

Annotations indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation, but the description adds no context about side effects, such as what happens if the date already has calendar events or if the plan can be rescheduled.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words, but it is too brief to convey necessary details, resulting in under-specification.

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 5 parameters (including an expected_hash and conflict flag) and an output schema (not detailed), the description omits crucial context about parameter semantics, return values, and how this tool differs from siblings like get_draft_plan or clone_draft_plan.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the five parameters (plan_id, expected_hash, start_date, confirmed, allow_calendar_conflicts), failing to add meaning beyond the bare 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 the tool applies a draft plan to the calendar on a specific future ISO date. This distinguishes it from siblings like unschedule_draft_plan (removes), rename_draft_plan, or add_workout_to_draft.

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 on when to use or avoid this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like unschedule_draft_plan or update_draft_workout exist, but no criteria for selection are provided.

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