get_available_years

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states 'List academic years in the catalog.' It doesn't mention whether the optional institution parameter affects results, whether the list is ordered (chronological vs reverse), whether it returns only years with available catalog data, or what the output schema contains. The presence of an output schema helps, but behavioral expectations remain underspecified.

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 short sentence with no wasted words. However, it is arguably under-specified rather than genuinely concise - it achieves brevity by omitting useful context rather than by tight editing of informative content.

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?

Despite having an output schema which reduces the burden on the description for return values, the tool has an unused optional parameter, no annotations, and zero schema coverage. The description doesn't clarify the meaning or effect of the institution parameter or how the list is ordered/filtered. For a simple 1-parameter tool this is functional but incomplete.

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%, and the description doesn't mention the institution parameter at all. The parameter is optional with a default of null, but the description provides zero guidance on what it does or how it filters the academic years. With a single parameter and no coverage, the description should have explained this.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('academic years in the catalog'). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like get_categories and list_courses by specifying the exact resource being fetched. It could be slightly more specific about the catalog context but is otherwise clear.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that this is likely a prerequisite step before querying courses or categories, nor does it contrast with sibling tools. The tool name suggests it feeds into filtered lookups, but this is merely implied, not stated.

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