dashboard

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Přehled' reasonably signals an informational, read-only view, but the description does not state how data is aggregated, whether it is personalized, or what happens when there are no current events. The gap is modest given the low-risk nature of a dashboard.

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 a single front-loaded sentence that names the tool's nature and key content sections without filler. Every element earns its place and no schema details are redundantly repeated.

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 zero-parameter dashboard with no output schema, the description sufficiently captures what the tool shows and where the data comes from. It could mention empty-state behavior, but that is not essential for an agent to invoke this simple overview tool correctly.

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 zero parameters and full schema coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description correctly avoids inventing argument details, leaving the no-arguments contract fully determined by 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?

The description specifies that the tool returns a dashboard overview with three named content sections sourced from the Student homepage. Although it uses the noun 'Přehled' instead of an explicit verb, the intent is unambiguous and the content is distinguishable from more specific siblings like kalendar or udalosti.

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 a broad, consolidated summary use case, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer dashboard over alternatives such as deadlines, udalosti, or kalendar. It provides context about the source (titulní stránka) without explaining when not to use it.

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