get_timetable_changes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only mentions the default date behavior and does not disclose output format, required auth state, or whether the changes are scoped to a specific user or subdomain.

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 one efficient sentence with the key action and default behavior front-loaded. Every word contributes value and there is no fluff.

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 the tool being simple, the absence of parameter semantics, return-value information, and any usage context leaves gaps. An agent cannot reliably determine the date format, what subdomain means, or what the response contains.

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 coverage is 0% and the description only partially clarifies date_str via 'for a date (default today)'. The subdomain parameter is entirely unexplained, leaving the agent unable to determine its format or role.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('substitution/timetable changes') plus the relevant date scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling timetable tools by emphasizing 'changes' rather than the regular timetable or ranges.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_timetable, get_timetable_range, or get_next_week_timetable. There is no mention of prerequisites like authentication or subdomain selection.

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