Get Upcoming Due Dates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that it aggregates across all courses and covers assignments, quizzes, and other items. It doesn't disclose return format, pagination, or how the 'specified time window' is exactly applied, but the read-only safety profile is already covered.

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 two sentences with no filler: the first states the operation and scope, the second gives concrete user-facing trigger phrases. It is front-loaded and 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?

For a read-only tool with two optional, fully documented parameters, the description covers scope, item types, and typical use cases. It doesn't describe the exact return shape or disambiguate from get_assignments, but it is largely complete for a simple fetch 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 100%, so the schema already documents courseId as an optional filter and daysAhead with default and bounds. The description only refers generically to a 'specified time window' and adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 ('Fetch') and names the resource ('upcoming due dates across all your courses'), and it identifies what items are included and the time-window scope. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from the sibling get_assignments, but its cross-course aggregate purpose is clear.

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 gives explicit trigger scenarios: when the user asks about deadlines, what's due, upcoming work, or what to do this week. It doesn't provide exclusions or name alternatives like get_assignments, so some overlap ambiguity remains.

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