Retrieve published assignment deadlines for selected courses within a specified time window, so students can plan their workload before due dates arrive.
Collect published assignment deadlines from selected courses. Other deadlines can appear in quizzes, calendar and instructions; check those separately.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| days | No | ||
| courseIds | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false Senator, so safety profile is covered. Description adds scope limitation ('published assignment deadlines') and explicitly notes incompleteness (other deadline sources), which is useful. Missing details like return format or default behavior but annotations cover the main behavioral traits.
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?
Two sentences: first clearly defines the tool's function, second warns about alternative sources. Front-loaded with the primary purpose quickly, no filler words. Highly efficient.
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 2 parameters (one with strong schema description), no output schema, and clear sibling context, the description is mostly complete. It explains the scope and what it does not cover. The only missing piece is a brief explanation of the days parameter semantics, but schema provides default/range. Overall adequate for agent to correctly call the tool.
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. The description does not explain the parameters (courseIds, days) beyond what the schema provides. The schema already includes descriptions for courseIds (Brightspace numeric identifier from another tool) and days has default/max/min but no semantic context. The description's omission of parameter meaning is a gap, but the schema itself does decently with types and defaults, so baseline 3 is fair.
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 ('collect'), resource ('published assignment deadlines'), and scope ('from selected courses'). Distinguishes from siblings like list_assignments and get_calendar by noting other deadlines can appear in quizzes, calendar and instructions.
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?
Explicitly says when to use: for published assignment deadlines, and explicitly excludes quizzes, calendar, and instructions, advising to check those separately. Guides the agent away from relying solely on this tool for all deadlines.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.