list_degree_timetables

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only and idempotent nature is well covered. The description adds that it accesses the USC page of a degree, which gives context about the external source, but it does not disclose potential delays, pagination, or rate limits. This matches the baseline for a tool with strong annotations.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. There is no filler or repetition, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

With two parameters, one required, and no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns and the exact meaning of each parameter. It does not describe the output format (e.g., a list of timetables with which fields) or the effect of omitting course_number. An agent cannot confidently infer the correct usage without external knowledge of the USC page structure.

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 must explain the parameters. 'por curso' hints at course_number but does not clarify that null likely means all courses or how to specify a course number. 'página USC de una titulación' hints at degree_url but does not explain the expected URL format or how it relates to the degree. The description provides minimal added meaning beyond parameter names.

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 ('Descubre' - discover), a clear resource (official schedules by course), and a source (the USC page of a degree). It is concise and indicates the tool's scope, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_degree_class_timetable. The purpose is understandable and specific enough.

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 the many sibling tools (e.g., get_degree_class_timetable, list_official_exam_degrees). There is no mention of exclusions, alternatives, or specific scenarios. An agent is left without context to select this tool correctly among similar options.

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