Public Final Exam Schedule

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond them by stating the endpoint is public and requires no login, which tells the agent it can be called without an authenticated session.

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?

A single tight sentence with the key qualifiers front-loaded after the verb and resource. No filler or redundancy.

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, and annotations cover the behavioral profile; the description supplies the auth-free public context. The only meaningful gap is the unexplained format of department_code, which an agent needs in order to call the tool correctly.

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% and the single parameter is undocumented in the schema, so the description carries the burden. It only restates the parameter name as 'department code' without giving format, examples (e.g. 'CSE'), or accepted values, adding essentially nothing beyond the schema title.

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 (read), resource (official OBS final-exam schedule) and scope (department code, public). It implicitly separates itself from the authenticated siblings like get_personal_exam_calendar via 'public, no login', though it does not name an alternative explicitly.

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 parenthetical '(public, no login)' signals the context in which this tool applies versus authenticated exam tools, which is useful implied guidance. However, no alternative tool is named and no when-not condition is stated, so the routing is left to inference.

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