get_timetable

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

With no annotations, the description covers parameter behavior (defaults, resolution) and return format. Yet it omits broader behavioral traits like authentication requirements, idempotency, or potential side effects. It does not contradict any annotations since none exist.

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 structured with clear sections (Args, Returns) and is front-loaded with the core purpose. It is slightly verbose but each sentence provides value; could be tightened without losing meaning.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters with conditional logic) and no annotations, the description adequately covers parameter semantics and return format. However, it lacks mention of assumed prerequisites like login status, which might be implied by the context but is not explicit.

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 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter's format, defaults, and behavior (e.g., date_str format, class_name fallback, student_name resolution, school condition). This adds significant 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 clearly states the tool retrieves the timetable for a given date with a default to today. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_next_week_timetable or get_timetable_changes, though the date-specific language somewhat distinguishes it.

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 explains parameter defaults and conditions (e.g., student_name resolves class automatically, school only needed with multiple schools), providing usage context. However, it lacks guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings or when not to use it.

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