My timetable

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the returned field set and the default range, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or behavior when the range is empty; with annotations doing the heavy lifting, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single efficient sentence front-loads the resource and the returned fields, then closes with the default range. Every clause adds information and there is no filler.

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 two-optional-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description covers what the tool returns and its default window. Only minor gaps remain, such as ordering or empty-result behavior, which are not essential for correct invocation.

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%: both 'from' and 'to' are fully documented with formats, defaults, and the 120-day cap. The description's 'between two dates' and 'default: next 7 days' merely restate what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb-plus-resource ('Your classes from Aurion') and enumerates the returned fields (course, room, teacher, type, on-campus/online), so the agent knows exactly what it gets. It does not distinguish itself from siblings such as aurion_view or bb_upcoming, which keeps it below a 5.

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 'Default: the next 7 days' line implies when the tool is appropriate and what happens if no dates are passed, which is useful context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of the alternative tools (aurion_view, bb_upcoming) that could serve similar needs.

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