kupid_get_schedule_detail

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states that it retrieves details, with no mention of side effects, authentication requirements, or other notable behaviors. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's impact.

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 brief and front-loaded, but the structure is minimal. It consists of a single sentence and an 'Args' list, which is adequate but could be better organized for clarity.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks information about usage flow (e.g., dependence on kupid_get_schedules) and potential constraints, making it partially complete for a simple detail look-up tool.

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's parameter explanations are critical. It adds value by specifying that schedule_id is the index from kupid_get_schedules results and message_id comes from the same source, providing essential context not in 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 clearly states that the tool retrieves details of a KUPID academic schedule, with a specific verb and resource. It implicitly differentiates from sibling tool 'kupid_get_schedules' by its need for a schedule_id, but does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., kupid_get_schedules). It does not mention prerequisites or context, such as that it should be used after obtaining a schedule_id from kupid_get_schedules.

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