Get Upcoming Due Dates

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully explains that due dates are derived from assignments and quizzes, which adds context beyond the schema. However, it doesn't describe output shape, timezone handling, or whether past-due items are excluded, which are relevant for this kind of aggregation 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?

Two compact sentences: one states what the tool does and where the data comes from, the other gives clear usage cues. There is no redundancy or filler, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 description covers the tool's purpose, data source, and usage triggers, which is sufficient for a simple read-only aggregation tool with optional parameters. Since there is no output schema, a little more detail about the returned due-date format would make it fully complete, but the core calling context is well covered.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both courseId and daysAhead. The description reinforces the default 'across all courses' behavior and the upcoming-time window, but it doesn't add meaningful parameter-level detail beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch upcoming due dates across all your courses.' It also clarifies the source (assignments/dropbox folders and quizzes). It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_assignments, but the aggregated 'across all courses' framing makes the intent clear.

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 gives explicit trigger conditions: 'when the user asks about deadlines, what's due, upcoming work, or what they need to do this week.' It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternative tool names, so it falls just short of a 5.

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