kreta_school_calendar

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

The annotations already establish readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds no behavioral detail beyond naming the data domain; it does not mention child-scoping, limit behavior, staleness, or other caveats. It aligns with the annotations, so there is no contradiction.

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?

One short sentence with no filler, front-loading the core action and resource. It is concise, though the brevity comes at the cost of missing contextual detail that other dimensions penalize.

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 two-parameter tool with no required arguments, an agent can call it with defaults, but a correct targeted call is underspecified: the meaning of 'child' is absent and there is no guidance on when to use it. The output schema and annotations cover returns and side effects, but not invocation semantics.

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%, and the description mentions neither 'child' nor 'limit'. The agent is left to guess what 'child' refers to and how limit applies to calendar results. The description provides zero compensation for the unannotated parameters.

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 concrete retrieval operation ('lekérése') for a specific resource: the school year's order and institutional days. The resource is distinct enough from siblings like kreta_timetable or kreta_week_schedule, though the description does not explicitly contrast it with 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?

There is no guidance about when to prefer this tool over the many sibling calendar/timetable tools, nor any exclusions or preconditions. The description implies usage only through the read-only verb. Not misleading, but effectively no guidance.

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