inscriptos_cursada_docente

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It mentions the input URL formats but does not state whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or how it handles invalid URLs. For a listing tool, this is a notable gap.

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, focused sentence that immediately states the action and the key input constraint. Every word earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the verb 'Lista'.

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 only one parameter, no annotations, and an output schema present, the description covers the essential contextual needs: purpose, input format, and scope. It could mention error behavior or prerequisites, but for a simple listing tool with an output schema, it is sufficiently 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?

The schema only defines 'url' as a generic string with 0% description coverage. The description compensates by specifying exactly which URL patterns are accepted (zona_comisiones/home/<hash> or inscriptos_cursadas/info_comision/<hash>), adding significant meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain the hash parameter, but the format guidance is valuable.

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 tool's function: listing enrollees (inscriptos) of a commission (comisión). It specifies the exact URL formats accepted, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like inscriptos_examen_docente (exam enrollees) and alumnos_cursada_docente (course students).

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?

The description provides clear context on when to use the tool: when you have a single URL matching the specified patterns. It emphasizes 'SOLA URL' (single URL), giving a concrete constraint. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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