date

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns the current date and time, which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as format of the return value, whether it's real-time or cached, error handling for invalid timezones, or any rate limits. The description is minimal and lacks essential context for safe invocation.

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 very concise and front-loaded: it states the core purpose in the first sentence and adds optional parameter info in the second. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return format (e.g., string, object), error conditions, or how the timezone parameter affects output. For a tool with potential complexity in timezone handling, more context is needed to ensure correct usage.

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 has one parameter 'timezone' with 0% description coverage. The description adds value by specifying it's optional and related to timezone, but doesn't provide details like expected format (e.g., IANA timezone names) or examples. With low schema coverage, the description partially compensates but not fully, aligning with the baseline for minimal param info.

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's purpose: 'Returns the current date and time' with an optional timezone parameter. It uses specific verbs ('returns') and identifies the resource ('current date and time'), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'format-date' or 'get-timezone-info' beyond mentioning timezone as optional.

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 implies usage by mentioning 'Optionally specify a timezone,' which suggests when to use this parameter. However, it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like 'get-timezone-info' or 'format-date,' nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions for use.

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