calculate_study_schedule

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

No annotations were provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return shape (total_hours_needed, daily_hours_needed, feasible) but does not discuss any side effects, permissions, or safety traits. For a calculator, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second gives return structure and a reference to related tools. No wasted words, front-loaded key 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?

Parameters fully specified in schema, return structure provided in description. For a simple calculator, no output schema needed beyond the described fields. Missing error handling or constraints, but overall complete.

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?

Input schema has 100% field coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description mentions exam_date and topics but not hours_per_topic explicitly. It adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, 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?

Description clearly states the tool generates a study schedule based on exam date and topics, with specific verb and resource. It hints at related calculators via list_bundles but does not explicitly differentiate from many 'calculate_*' siblings.

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 tells what the tool does and references list_bundles for related calculators, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use or avoid this tool versus alternatives.

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