getResources

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'Get resources'. It implies a read-only operation but does not mention response format, pagination, required parameters, or limitations. This is a significant gap for an unannotated tool.

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 with no filler or redundant content. It efficiently conveys the core purpose.

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 4 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is thin. It does not explain the return shape, the meaning of the date/time parameters, or how resources are filtered. The agent is left to infer too much, making this inadequate for a tool with this complexity.

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 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description itself does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond the parenthetical clarification of what 'resources' means, which is already partially in the name.

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 gets 'resources (rooms, equipment)', which is a specific verb+object. It distinguishes the resource type with a parenthetical, making the purpose unambiguous among siblings, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like getBookableItems.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getBookableItems or getLocations. There are no exclusions or context hints for appropriate invocation.

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