boardsesh_get_progression

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavior beyond annotations: chronological ordering ('oldest period first') and the concrete set of per-period statistics, which helps set expectations for the response structure.

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 with no filler. The core behavior is front-loaded, followed by usage guidance and output expectations. Every sentence earns its place and keeps the description scannable.

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 the tool has only two optional parameters, complete schema descriptions, full annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the remaining gaps: when to use the tool, what ordering to expect, and what fields appear in each period. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 both parameters are already fully documented with allowed values and defaults. The description only reinforces the month/week concept rather than adding parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Return climbing progression over time', and adds a meaningful behavioral detail ('oldest period first'). It also clarifies what each period contains, which helps distinguish this from sibling summary or session 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 explicitly says when to use it: 'when the user asks whether they are improving, about trends, or for a month-by-month or week-by-week view.' It does not name alternatives or provide explicit when-not-to-use exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to route correctly.

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