Search the course catalog by code, name, or period, with optional filters for faculty and academic period. Get course details and direct links for a specific term.
Vyhledávání v katalogu předmětů (kód, název, období, odkaz na detail). Fakulta = číselné ID (prázdné = moje fakulta), období = název ('podzim 2026', prázdné = aktuální).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dotaz | Yes | ||
| limit | No | ||
| obdobi | No | ||
| fakulta_id | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions search (implying read-only) but does not explicitly state side effects, return format, or any limitations. It covers some parameter behavior but not the tool's overall behavior.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and efficiently packs parameter clarifications. No wasted words.
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 search tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks return format, pagination, and full semantics for all parameters. It provides only partial guidance, leaving an agent to infer behavior.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining 'fakulta_id' (numeric, empty = my faculty) and 'obdobi' (name, e.g., 'podzim 2026', empty = current). However, 'dotaz' and 'limit' are not clarified beyond 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 clearly states the tool searches the subject catalog by code, name, period, and provides a link to detail. It is specific about the resource and action, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like 'predmet_info' or 'moje_predmety'.
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 explains parameter usage (faculty ID empty means my faculty, period format) but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or 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.