get_announcements

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: newest-first ordering with ISO 8601 timestamps, the course-scoping fallback chain (profile courses via set_active_courses, else all), and the specific cap that include_body only returns text for the 5 newest items.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns before adding the parameter notes. Nearly every clause carries information; the parenthetical Spanish/English label for the forum is the only slightly redundant touch.

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?

With no output schema, the description must carry return-shape information, and it does state ordering, date format, and that body text appears only for the 5 newest. It omits the remaining fields of each announcement (title, author, etc.), which an agent would need to reason about downstream.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline would be 3, but the description goes further by explaining the interaction between course_id, all_courses, and the active-course profile, plus clarifying that 'since' filters on activity date rather than publication. These precedence rules are not visible in the schema.

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?

States a specific resource (recent announcements from the news forum), scope (one course or all), and ordering (newest to oldest, ISO 8601 dates). It implicitly distinguishes itself from the general forum tools by naming the 'Avisos/Novedades' forum, but never explicitly contrasts with siblings like get_autogestion_avisos or get_forum_discussions, leaving some ambiguity about which announcements feed to pick.

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 line 'Sin course_id usa las materias del perfil (set_active_courses) o todas' gives useful default-resolution context, and since/include_body behavior is described. However, there is no explicit 'use this when…' guidance and no named alternative tool or exclusion, so the agent must infer when this beats get_autogestion_avisos or get_forum_discussions.

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