generate_weekly_schedule

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

The description indicates that the schedule is 'unsaved', which suggests it does not persist changes, but it does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or whether it modifies any state. With annotations absent, the description carries the burden but only partially covers behavioral transparency.

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 that conveys the core functionality without unnecessary fluff. It is well-structured and easy to parse, though it could be slightly more detailed without becoming verbose.

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?

The description lacks crucial context: it does not describe the output format, the meaning of each parameter in detail, or the relationship to other tools. Given the complexity of the inputs (enums, booleans) and the absence of an output schema, the description is insufficient for a user to fully understand how to use the tool.

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?

The parameters (weekStart, scheduleType, applyHolidays, applyCenterClosures) are not explained in the description. The description mentions 'overrides' but there is no corresponding parameter, and the meanings of weekStart and scheduleType are left unspecified. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the inputs.

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 verb 'Generate' and the resource 'weekly schedule', and specifies that it is 'unsaved' and based on 'the weekly template plus holidays, center closures, and overrides'. This distinguishes it from other schedule-related tools like get_schedule or save_schedule.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for creating a draft before saving, nor does it contrast with tools like find_available_slots or validate_schedule. The context of when this generation is appropriate is missing.

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