uned_plan

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

With zero annotations the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one important side effect: the plan is written to ~/UNED/plan-semanal.md. However it omits whether an existing file is overwritten, whether login is required, and any rate or cost behavior, so the disclosure is partial.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the persistence detail. Nothing is redundant and nothing needs trimming.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the destination file is given. Still missing for a generation tool with two undocumented numeric inputs is any note on overwrite semantics, authentication expectations, or how weeks interact with the hourly budget.

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% for both parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not: 'repartiendo tus horas' hints at horas_semana but never explains semanas, the default values (4 / 10), or whether hours are a weekly total. An agent must guess the units and effect of each 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Genera un plan de estudio semanal') plus the inputs it weighs: credits, pending syllabus and deadline proximity. No sibling offers plan generation, so no differentiation is needed, but it stops short of the 5-level by not clarifying scope such as which courses are included.

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 statement of when to reach for this tool versus the many uned_* siblings (e.g., uned_entregas, uned_progreso), nor any prerequisite such as being logged in. Usage is only inferable from the purpose sentence, which is the definition of 'no guidance'.

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