get_week_year

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but fails to describe key traits such as whether it's read-only, what format the output returns, error handling, or any constraints. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic function.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient, making it easy to parse quickly, which is ideal for clarity in tool selection.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and incomplete parameter documentation, the description is insufficient for a tool that performs date calculations. It should explain the return format, input date format expectations, and any behavioral nuances to be considered complete for effective use by an AI agent.

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 description does not mention the 'date' parameter at all, and with 0% schema description coverage, the parameter is undocumented in both the schema and description. However, since there is only one parameter, the baseline is higher, but the description adds no value beyond what the schema minimally provides, resulting in an average score.

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 verb 'Get' and the specific resources 'week and isoWeek of the year', making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_timestamp' or 'current_time' that might also provide time-related information, preventing a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_timestamp' or 'current_time'. It lacks context about typical use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based solely on the tool name and purpose.

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