Check if an imported university academic session is still valid before accessing timetables, exam schedules, or grades. Returns session status only, never cookie contents.
检查教务会话是否已导入、是否仍然有效。不会返回任何 Cookie 内容。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real context beyond them by disclosing what the tool will NOT return (no Cookie contents), which is meaningful privacy/security information not present in the annotations.
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 short sentences, zero padding, with the core check stated first and the security caveat second. Nothing is redundant with the schema or annotations.
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-value detail is not required in the description, and the zero-parameter surface keeps complexity low. The only shortfall is the absence of guidance on how session validity relates to calling the sibling data 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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. Schema coverage is 100% with an empty property set, and there is nothing parameter-related the description needs to or does clarify.
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 names a concrete verb and resource: checks whether the academic-affairs session has been imported and whether it is still valid. This is clearly a session-state probe, distinct in kind from the data-fetching siblings, though it never explicitly names them.
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?
Usage is only implied – an agent can infer this should be called to verify the session before invoking get_timetable/get_grades/etc. There is no explicit when-to-use, precondition, or statement of what to do if the check fails.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.