notas_cursada_docente

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. The verb 'Lista' implies a read-only operation, and the URL patterns are disclosed, but it does not explicitly state whether the operation is side-effect-free or if authentication is required. This adds useful but limited behavioral context.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains no filler. Every word contributes useful information.

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 simple one-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and URL constraint. It does not mention pagination or that only grades available at those specific pages are returned, but the output schema likely covers return structure.

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 has a single 'url' parameter with no description (0% coverage). The description compensates by specifying that the URL must match one of the two allowed path formats, giving the parameter concrete meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 states a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('notas cargadas de una cursada'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like detalle_cursada_docente (course details) or inscriptos_cursada_docente (enrolled students). It also pinpoints the exact URL contexts.

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?

It provides clear contextual guidance by restricting use to URLs from zona_comisiones/home/<hash> or cursada/edicion/<hash>. However, it does not explicitly describe when to use this tool over alternatives like buscar_acta_cursada_docente, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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