export_timetable_ics

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the optional semester start parameter and the ICS output, but does not mention default behavior, side effects, rate limits, or what exactly is included (e.g., all events?). This is minimal for a tool with no annotation safety cues.

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 long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes the only parameter in a natural way. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 simple export tool with one optional parameter and an existing output schema, the description covers the key aspects (purpose, param format, importability). It omits details about the output contents (e.g., what events are included), but the output schema likely fills that gap. Overall adequate.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaningful detail: the parameter 'semester_start' is optional, takes a YYYY-MM-DD format, and controls the semester start date. This compensates well for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 action ('Export timetable as ICS format'), the resource ('timetable'), and the output format (ICS). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_timetable' which likely returns data in a different format.

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 usage by mentioning import into calendar apps, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_timetable). No 'when-not' or exclusion criteria are provided.

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