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

Annotations already establish that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world mutation. The description adds useful partial-update behavior ('Send only what changes'), implying omitted fields remain unchanged, but does not clarify scope (all students, a class, or an academy-wide setting) or what happens immediately after the toggle.

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 with zero waste, front-loading the action and immediately following with the key partial-update instruction. Nothing superfluous is included.

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 four-parameter mutation tool with no schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits what each boolean toggles, the scope of the update, and any indication of the result or side effects, leaving important gaps for correct invocation.

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 four boolean parameters are documented only by their property names. The description does not explain what 'status', 'cancelled', 'new_class', or 'time_change' individually control, leaving the agent to infer their meaning.

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 states a specific verb ('turns on or off') and resource ('automatic class notices students get'), making the basic purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate this mutation tool from the sibling read tool get_student_notices.

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 only usage instruction is 'Send only what changes,' which explains partial-update payload behavior but not when to use this tool instead of get_student_notices or other notice-related tools. There are no prerequisites or exclusions.

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