elearning_get_jadwal

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Mengambil' implies a read-only operation, but it says nothing about authentication requirements (a sibling login tool exists), whether the result reflects the current semester, or what an empty schedule looks like. Given the zero-parameter simplicity, this is a moderate gap rather than a critical one.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the action, the resource, and the returned fields with zero filler. Nothing is wasted and nothing important is buried.

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 no-argument read tool with no output schema, the description covers what is fetched and what the response contains. It stops short of mentioning login dependency or empty-state handling, but those are minor for a tool of this complexity.

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 tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description usefully confirms the implicit scoping — the schedule is for the logged-in student and is weekly — which is the only semantic an agent could otherwise misunderstand.

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 gives a specific verb plus resource ('Mengambil jadwal perkuliahan mingguan mahasiswa') and even enumerates what the schedule contains (jam, ruangan, dosen pengampu). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like elearning_list_tugas or elearning_get_khs, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer it should call this to obtain the student's weekly class schedule. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer it over the dashboard tool or what preconditions (e.g. being logged in) apply.

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