get_changes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does explain the filtering behavior and the default date window (today through start+4 days), which is useful, but it says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or whether results are sorted or paginated.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose before the filtering detail, and the args block is compact. The 'Filters the timetable...' sentence is mildly redundant with the opening but earns its place by clarifying scope.

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 not be described. For a two-optional-parameter read tool this covers what an agent needs to invoke it; the only gap is the absence of any behavioral caveats that annotations would normally have supplied.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it names both parameters, specifies the YYYY-MM-DD format, and explains the default behavior of each. That is meaningfully more than the bare schema provides.

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 ('Detect') and resource ('timetable changes') and enumerates concrete change types (cancellations, substitutions, room swaps). The phrase 'modified from the original schedule' separates it from get_timetable, so an agent can pick it without opening the sibling schema.

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 conveys when to use it implicitly ('filters the timetable for lessons that have been modified'), but never names an alternative such as get_timetable or get_today, nor states when NOT to use it. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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