obs_get_scheduleRead your weekly class schedule and final exam calendar for a chosen semester from İTÜ OBS, so you can plan classes and exams.
Read weekly class schedule and final exam calendar for a semester.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| semester | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.1Output schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -trueOutput schema / propertiesAdded value: +{
+ "result": {
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "title": "Result",
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+}Output schema / requiredAdded value: +[
+ "result"
+]Output schema / titlePrevious value: -"obs_get_scheduleDictOutput"New value: +"obs_get_scheduleOutput"v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety and side-effect profile is covered. The description adds the useful fact that the call returns two distinct artifacts (weekly schedule and final exam calendar), but says nothing about auth requirements or what happens when semester is omitted.
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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, clearly leading with the verb and resource. It is arguably too terse for its gaps, but it is not padded or verbose.
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?
Complexity is low (one optional param) and an output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and annotations carry the safety profile. However, the missing semester-format guidance and lack of sibling differentiation leave meaningful gaps for an agent choosing among many schedule tools.
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 0% and the single semester parameter is nullable with a null default. The description only echoes that a semester is involved, giving no format guidance (e.g., term code or year) or the behavior when the parameter is left null, so it fails to compensate 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?
States a specific verb (Read) and two resources (weekly class schedule and final exam calendar) scoped to a semester. It does not differentiate itself from similar siblings such as get_public_course_schedule, get_public_exam_schedule, or get_personal_exam_calendar, so an agent cannot tell which schedule tool applies without opening schemas.
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?
No guidance on when to use this over the crowded set of schedule/exam siblings, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The only hint is the phrase 'for a semester', which implies scoping but not when this tool is the right choice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.