Get Registration Timeline

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does convey scope ('across all university faculties') and the kinds of data surfaced, but says nothing about authentication requirements, whether results are cached or live, or freshness of the dates, which matter for a registration-deadline tool.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope. The second sentence largely enumerates return fields rather than adding new guidance, which is mild redundancy given an output schema exists.

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 single optional-parameter read tool with a full output schema and 100% schema coverage, the description covers purpose and data scope adequately. The missing piece is authentication/freshness context, which is a minor gap rather than a blocking one.

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 100%, and the single term_id parameter is documented with a default and an example alternate value. The description never references term selection, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema; the documented baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('course registration waves, enrolment periods, and change periods'), plus the attribute set returned (student credit standing, registration shift, exact opening dates). That is enough to distinguish it from siblings like get_exam_dates or get_student_timetable, though it never explicitly contrasts 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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for registration/enrolment timing questions. There is no statement of when to prefer it over get_study_credit_summary for credit standing, no exclusions, and no prerequisite guidance.

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