earnings_calendar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds meaningful behavior: results are sourced from the user's calendar vendors, and the tool returns an empty list if no user/vendor key is present. This goes beyond the basic operation and helps an agent set expectations.

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 short and front-loaded with the core behavior, followed by a relevant caveat. The parenthetical date is slightly awkward but provides useful context, and no sentence is wasted.

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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers the main operational context: what is returned, the time window, and the important empty-list failure mode. It does not address sibling-tool differentiation, but that is a usage-guidance gap rather than a completeness gap.

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 input schema provides no description coverage for days_ahead. The description partially compensates by embedding 'days_ahead' in the prose and indicating it is a number of days, but it does not explain edge cases or behavior when omitted beyond the schema's default value.

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 returns companies reporting within a given number of days, tied to the connected user's calendar vendors. It is clear about the resource and timeframe, though it uses a participial phrase rather than an explicit verb like 'list' or 'return' and does not contrast itself with sibling calendar tools.

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 provides useful context: the tool depends on a connected user's calendar vendors, and without user/vendor keys it returns an empty list. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over siblings like economic_calendar or corporate_calendar, nor does it state exclusions.

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