search_classes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates a read-only operation on 'upcoming classes' and adds the 'upcoming' scope, but it does not disclose default date-range behavior, authentication needs, pagination, or result limits. Basic but not rich.

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 an efficient single sentence with the action first and filters following. It is appropriately short and front-loaded, though the misleading 'class type' phrase prevents it from being perfectly clean.

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?

The tool has four optional parameters and no annotations, but the description leaves class_ids unexplained and mislabels one filter. An output schema exists, so return-value details are less critical, but the description is still insufficient for an agent to confidently compose requests across all parameters.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description needs to compensate, but it only loosely maps 'center' and 'date range' to parameters. It never mentions class_ids and introduces 'class type' as a filter even though no such parameter exists, which could lead an agent to send an invalid argument.

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 provides a clear verb and resource ('Search upcoming classes') and names potential filters, so an agent can identify this as a search operation. However, it says filtering by 'class type' while the schema only exposes class_ids, center_ids, and date fields, making the stated purpose partially inaccurate.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of siblings like list_class_types, list_centers, or get_capabilities. The description implies a general search use case but does not state exclusions, alternatives, or prerequisites.

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