Chosun Timetable

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

With no annotations, the description should explicitly state that the tool is read-only and has no side effects. While 'Read' implies read-only behavior, it does not confirm safety or disclose any behavioral traits like whether the data is cached or if network access is required. The single-sentence description lacks transparency.

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 extremely concise at one sentence, with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, such as mentioning the parameter.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the timetable widget returns (e.g., schedule items, dates), nor does it provide context relative to sibling tools. The absence of output schema places a burden on the description to describe the return, which it fails to do.

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?

The input schema covers the single parameter (weekChange) completely, including default, constraints, and description. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is sufficient for a baseline score of 3.

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 the action ('Read') and the resource ('fixed timetable widget'), and the tool name and context differentiate it from sibling tools like chosun_academic_calendar and chosun_server_time. However, it does not specify what the timetable contains or how it differs from a dynamic timetable.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not explain when to use chosun_timetable instead of chosun_course_offerings or chosun_graduation_summary. The agent would need to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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