Retrieve your weekly class schedule for the active enrollment term or a specified Banner term code.
Deprecated alias for banner_get_weekly_schedule. Use banner_get_weekly_schedule for new integrations.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| term | No | Optional Banner term code. Omit to use the active enrollment term. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare this read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds deprecation status, a behavioral trait not captured by annotations, and indicates functional equivalence via the word 'alias'.
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, front-loaded sentence states the deprecation and the recommended replacement with zero wasted words. The structure maximizes scannability for an agent deciding whether to call this tool.
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 deprecated alias with one optional parameter and read-only annotations, the description conveys enough to route an agent correctly. It does not describe return values, but pointing to the canonical sibling implicitly covers that.
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 coverage is 100%, so the optional term parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance, which is acceptable given the schema already carries the burden.
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 identifies the tool as a deprecated alias for banner_get_weekly_schedule and directs users to the canonical sibling. It does not restate the underlying operation, but the name plus the named target make the purpose unambiguous.
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 explicitly states that banner_get_weekly_schedule should be used for new integrations, providing clear routing away from this alias. It implies legacy use may still exist but does not spell out whether this tool is still operational.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.