List Available Curricula

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safe read behavior. Description adds no further behavioral traits beyond the implied read-only nature of 'lists'. Not contradictory, but no value added.

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?

Very concise: one sentence, front-loaded with action verb 'lists', no unnecessary words. Efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

Adequate for a simple list tool with clear annotations. Lacks context on what 'curricula' are, any prerequisites (e.g., login?), or connection to other tools. Moderately complete.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. Merely states 'for a timetable URL' without explaining the parameter's role, format, or how to obtain it. Inadequate for a single parameter.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('lists') and resource ('available curricula') with context ('for a timetable URL'). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'unibo_calendar_list_teachings', missing a chance to distinguish purpose.

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 like 'unibo_calendar_list_teachings' or 'unibo_calendar_resolve_timetable_url'. Missing exclusions or prerequisites.

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