calculate_jet_lag_recovery

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

No annotations are provided. The description identifies the operation as estimation, implying it is read-only and non-destructive. However, it does not explicitly state safety or side effects, which is acceptable for a calculator but could be improved.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and then providing output details and a pointer to related tools. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 one parameter and an output schema indicated, the description covers purpose, input, output, and related tools. It lacks mention of estimation assumptions or accuracy, but overall it is sufficient for correct tool selection and invocation.

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% and the schema already describes the parameter well. The description adds context about direction of travel but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema. The mention of output structure adds value but not to parameter semantics directly.

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 estimates jet lag recovery time based on timezone difference and direction of travel, and specifies the return structure. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like calculate_timezone_convert by focusing on recovery time estimation.

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 only mentions 'see list_bundles for related voyage calculators' but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. There is no explanation of when this tool is preferred over alternatives.

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