get_announcements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that the tool returns 'attachment metadata' (not the attachment content) and can be filtered by an ISO timestamp, which is behavior beyond the annotation hints. It is consistent with the read-only nature, so no contradiction.

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, well-structured sentence. It front-loads the main action and resource, then appends the optional filter without redundancy. Every word contributes to the 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 there is no output schema, the description does not describe the response structure, pagination, or potential default behavior. It covers the core purpose and parameter, but for a read tool that returns a list of announcements with metadata, more detail on return format or limits would improve completeness.

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 only 50%: only courseId has a description. The description explains the 'since' parameter as an optional ISO timestamp for filtering, which the schema omits. This adds meaningful semantic for the undocumented parameter, partially compensating for the coverage gap.

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 ('Read') and names the exact resource ('course announcements and attachment metadata'), and adds an optional time filter. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_announcement_attachment, which reads a specific attachment file.

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 implies when to use it (to fetch announcements and their metadata), but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as read_announcement_attachment for downloading individual attachments. No exclusions or competing scenarios are provided.

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