Get Upcoming Due Dates

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully discloses the submissionStatus values and the UTC ISO date format, including the need to convert to local time. It does not mention sorting, pagination, or the effect of optional filters, but the described behavior is meaningful and goes beyond a generic 'get' statement.

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 compact and front-loaded: it immediately states what the tool returns, then adds valuable detail about statuses and date formatting, and ends with a clear usage directive. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core return semantics, including submission statuses and date formats. It could mention optional filtering behavior or default daysAhead, but the schema already documents those defaults and range, so the description is reasonably complete for a straightforward read tool.

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 the schema already documents both courseId and daysAhead. The description adds context about 'all courses' but does not enhance the meaning of the parameters themselves beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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: get upcoming due dates across all courses, and clarifies the scope (all courses). It also distinguishes itself from general assignment listing by emphasizing submission status and deadlines, making the tool's purpose clear relative to siblings like get_assignments.

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 'Use for deadlines and what's due,' which gives the agent clear guidance on when to invoke this tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is strong enough for selection among the sibling tools.

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