Get Student Timetable

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden; it does disclose the exact source URL and the shape of the data retrieved, which is genuinely useful provenance. However, it says nothing about authentication requirements (relevant given set_session_cookies and check_auth_status among siblings) or about behavior when no timetable is published. The existence of an output schema relieves it of describing return values.

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 front-loaded sentence naming the resource and its contents, with no filler. The trailing source URL is somewhat operational detail an agent may not need, but it is compact and does add provenance.

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 zero-argument read tool with a full output schema, the description covers what is fetched and where from, which is nearly everything needed. The notable omission is the authentication/session prerequisite, which matters in a toolset that includes login helpers.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to add; the documented baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') with a specific resource ('the student's personal timetable') and enumerates the returned content types (lectures, seminars, labs, rooms, and times), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_exam_dates and get_enrolled_courses. It never names a sibling explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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 the weekly class schedule, and the absence of parameters makes misuse unlikely. There is no statement of when-not-to-use it, no pointer to get_exam_dates or get_enrolled_courses as alternatives, and no mention of any prerequisite session/auth state despite auth-related siblings existing.

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