get_registration_window
Check how far in advance you can register for meals in the IIIT Hyderabad Mess Management System.
Instructions
Get how far in advance you can register for meals
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Check how far in advance you can register for meals in the IIIT Hyderabad Mess Management System.
Get how far in advance you can register for meals
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation ('Get'), but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what the return format might be (e.g., days, hours, policy details). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to handle the tool.
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, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.
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 has no parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It explains what the tool does but lacks details on return values, error handling, or behavioral context, which are needed for full agent understanding. The absence of annotations exacerbates this gap.
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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of inputs. The description doesn't need to add parameter information, and it correctly implies no inputs are required, earning a baseline score of 4 for this context.
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's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('how far in advance you can register for meals'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_registration' or 'get_registrations', which appear related but have different scopes.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'get_registration' and 'get_registrations' present, there's no indication of whether this tool is for policy information versus actual registration data, leaving usage context unclear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/NJP6969/IIITH-mess-MCP'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server