Sport lessons available for enrollment

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint), so the bar is lower, and the description still adds useful behavior: the default 7-day range and the fact that it only surfaces enrollable lessons without enrolling. It does not mention pagination or result-size behavior.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the scope, then defaults, then the dependency and the read-only clarification. Efficient overall, though the 'does not enroll' clause partly restates the readOnlyHint annotation.

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 an 8-parameter, zero-required, read-only query tool with annotations but no output schema, the description supplies the key operational facts (default window, filter source, no enrollment side effect). What is returned is only sketched ('lessons ... with free places'), but the schema covers the parameters well.

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 88%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: the implicit default date window (7 days from today) and the provenance of the filter ids (itmo_get_sport_filters) that feed sport_type_id/building_id/teacher_isu.

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 the specific resource (physical education lessons open for enrollment, with free places and enrollment restrictions) and thereby distinguishes itself from siblings like itmo_get_sport_status, itmo_get_sport_competitions and itmo_get_sport_filters. It lacks an explicit retrieval verb, but the scope is 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?

It gives clear operating context: the default 7-day window, that filter ids must come from itmo_get_sport_filters, and that this is not an enrollment action. It stops short of explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance against a specific alternative tool.

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