Get Timetable ICS

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating it returns an ICS string. No details on error behavior, rate limits, or handling of large calendars are provided.

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 a single, efficient sentence that conveys the core functionality. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making it less useful despite its conciseness.

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?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and only basic annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain parameter roles, output format details, or dependencies (e.g., needing to use unibo_calendar_resolve_timetable_url first).

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 offers no explanation of parameters. While parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, terms like 'curriculum' and 'selected_teaching_codes' remain ambiguous, leaving the agent without guidance on valid values or required format.

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 ('Fetches'), the resource ('timetable events'), and the output ('returns an ICS calendar string'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like unibo_calendar_get_events which likely returns events in a different format.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., resolve timetable URL first) or provide context for selection among related calendar tools.

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