Notas de SISACAD (parciales oficiales)

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the burden of transparency. It states that the tool only reads pre-saved data, does not open browsers, and does not access third-party data. It also describes the return structure (course items with grades, weight, absence, and weighted average), providing full behavioral insight.

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 concise, consisting of three sentences. The first sentence states the main purpose, the second explains the behavior and return elements, and the third provides usage guidance for empty data. Every sentence adds value, and the description is front-loaded.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is complete. It covers purpose, the underlying system, behavioral traits, return structure, and fallback instructions. No additional information is needed for an agent to use this 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 tool has zero parameters (schema coverage 100%), so the baseline is 4. The description adds meaning by detailing the returned data structure (parcial, nota, peso, ausente, weightedAverageSoFar), which compensates for the lack of parameters.

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 that the tool returns official partial grades from SISACAD, differentiating it from sibling tools like dutic_get_grades. It specifies that it reads data already captured by 'dutic sisacad', which is a separate system requiring CAPTCHA. This provides a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from other tools.

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 that the tool only reads already saved data and does not open a browser or access third-party data. It also instructs the user to run 'dutic sisacad' on the terminal if no data exists. While it doesn't explicitly list alternative tools or conditions when not to use, it gives clear context and a fallback action.

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