kreta_homework

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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful default-window behavior, but it does not disclose how limit or child affect results, which would add further transparency beyond the annotations.

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 focused sentence leads with the verb and resource, then immediately provides the practical default date window. There is no filler or unnecessary repetition, and the structure is easy to parse quickly.

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 rich annotations, output schema, and non-required parameters with defaults, the core retrieval behavior is reasonably complete for agent selection and default invocation. It is slightly held back by missing parameter guidance, especially around child and limit, but those are partly inferable from schema defaults.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate, but it only clarifies the date-range concept and defaults. It does not explain the child parameter, how limit works, or the expected date string format, leaving significant meaning to be inferred.

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 states a clear action and resource: retrieving homework assignments for a date range, and it adds a concrete default window. It does not explicitly contrast with kreta_homework_detail, so it stops short of fully distinguishing itself from that closely related sibling.

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 implies this tool is appropriate for date-range homework retrieval and clarifies the default range, but it gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer kreta_homework_detail or when not to use this tool. Usage is mostly inferred from the wording rather than stated.

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