uned_entregas

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It conveys useful scope (all courses, forward-looking window) but never states that this is a read-only query, nor anything about authentication, rate limits, or ordering of results.

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 that states scope and time window with no filler. Nothing is repeated from the schema and every clause earns its place.

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 one-parameter, read-only query tool with an output schema that defines return values, the description covers what the tool returns and the time window. Only the read-only nature and any ordering/pagination behavior are left unstated.

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 single parameter 'dias' has 0% schema description coverage and only a default of 30. The description supplies its meaning by tying it to 'próximos N días', which is the key semantic the schema omits, though it does not state units explicitly (days are inferable from context).

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 names the resource (entregas/tareas) and the scope (next N days, all courses), so an agent can tell it returns upcoming assignment deadlines rather than calendar events or grades. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar siblings like uned_calendario_ics or uned_eventos.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative sibling is named for overlapping queries such as deadlines vs. events or the ICS calendar. The intended usage is only implied by the phrase 'próximos N días'.

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