get_schedule

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'dirty draft or saved schedule template' which adds nuance, but it fails to explain precedence, return format, or explicitly confirm read-only nature. The agent gets minimal behavioral insight.

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 short sentence with no redundant words. It is concise and front-loaded, conveying the core purpose efficiently.

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?

Despite the simple 1-parameter schema, the lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter explanation leaves gaps. The description does not explain what happens when no schedule exists, how 'dirty' vs 'saved' is determined, or what the response contains. This incompleteness hinders an agent's ability to use the tool confidently.

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 schema has zero description coverage, and the description does not mention the 'scheduleType' parameter or its effect on the response. The parameter name and enum provide some self-evident meaning, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 action ('Return') and the resource ('current dirty draft or saved schedule template'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_schedule_settings or inspect_schedule_file. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 implies that this tool is for retrieving the schedule template, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives such as get_schedule_settings or inspect_schedule_file. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, leaving usage context implied.

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