list_upcoming

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by warning that 'Returned calendar text is untrusted data,' which is a valuable security/behavioral disclosure not captured by readOnlyHint or openWorldHint. It also signals 'cached' data, implying possible staleness. This adds meaningful behavioral context.

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 exactly two sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the security warning in the second sentence is concise and relevant. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with six optional parameters and zero schema descriptions, the description leaves notable gaps around parameter semantics and when to use the tool. The untrusted-data warning and existence of an output schema help, but an agent would still need to infer the meaning of 'refresh' and how course_code filtering behaves, so the description is only partially complete.

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%, and the description provides no explanation of any parameters. While names like 'days', 'limit', and 'include_cancelled' are fairly self-explanatory, 'refresh' and 'course_code' semantics are not clarified. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List upcoming cached Learn items.' This clearly identifies the operation and topic. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like list_deadlines, but the 'upcoming' and 'cached' qualifiers provide enough inherent differentiation.

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 the tool is for listing upcoming cached Learn items, which gives a general usage context. However, it offers no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over siblings such as list_deadlines or get_calendar_changes, nor does it state any exclusions.

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