Release calendar

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent safety profile, but the description adds real substance beyond them: `id` is only populated after publication (so the field is conditionally absent), the calendar is Jalali with month 1 = فروردین, and planned dates can shift. That last caveat is the kind of data-reliability trait annotations cannot express.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then the use case, then the item shape and caveats, in four tight sentences with no filler. Slightly dense with backtick and parenthetical asides, but every sentence carries information.

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 no output schema, the description accepts the burden of describing the returned item's fields and the conditional `id`, which it does. It leaves result volume, ordering and whether the whole-year default paginates unstated, a minor gap for a calendar lookup.

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 100%, so the schema already explains year, month (1-12 or Persian name, omit for whole year) and the all-terms-must-match `query`. The description adds only the Jalali convention note, which largely duplicates the schema's own 'Jalali year of the calendar' wording and never mentions the `query` filter at all, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource: 'Get the Statistical Centre of Iran's publishing calendar: which statistics come out on which day of a month.' It also enumerates what each item contains (product, responsible office, month/day, covered period), which is far more than the name 'am_calendar' alone conveys.

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?

Gives an explicit use case ('Use it to answer "when is the next inflation (or labour force, GDP...) release"') and routes the agent downstream ('`id` is set once the release is published: pass it to am_release'). Missing an explicit when-not or a contrast against am_search/am_news, but the scenario is unambiguous.

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