aula_get_site_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not indicate whether authentication is required (implicit from 'logged-in user' but not stated), what data fields are returned, or any caching/rate-limit behavior. For a read-only info tool the risk is low, but the description adds little 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?

A single efficient sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be front-loaded more clearly (site info vs user info) and is slightly under-specified for the amount of information it tries to cover.

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?

With no parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description needs to carry the weight of explaining what data is returned and in what context. It identifies the two data sources but doesn't clarify the return structure or the distinction between the aula virtual and Moodle site, leaving the agent with moderate uncertainty.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. Nothing to document and nothing missing.

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 it returns logged-in user's data from UTN FRBA's virtual classroom and Moodle site, which is a specific resource. However, it mingles two data domains (user profile vs. site info) without clarifying which the tool actually returns, and the tool name says 'site_info' while the description leads with user data. This ambiguity prevents a clear 4.

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 on when to use this tool versus the sibling aula_list_courses, no prerequisites, and no indication of what context this information is useful for. The description is purely declarative with zero usage direction.

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