get_university_profileFull BrightKey profile for one university by slug: tier ratings + why, verdict, strengths/weaknesses, cost estimate, admissions tips. Bilingual.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lang | No | Response language; defaults to en. | |
| slug | Yes | e.g. harvard-university, eth-zurich |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the description's mention of 'Full profile' adds minimal safety context. The description does not disclose additional behaviors like rate limits or auth requirements, but the existing annotation covers the safety profile adequately. No contradiction.
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 concise (two sentences, ~20 words) and front-loaded with the core action and key contents. No unnecessary words or repetition.
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?
Given the lack of an output schema, the description adequately explains return values by listing profile components (tier ratings, verdict, etc.) and mentions bilingual support. It covers the essential expected output for a profile 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 coverage is 100%, with both parameters (slug and lang) well-described in the schema. The description adds 'Bilingual' which ties to lang, but does not provide significant extra meaning beyond the schema's enum and description.
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 clearly states the tool retrieves a 'Full BrightKey profile for one university by slug' and lists specific contents (tier ratings, verdict, strengths/weaknesses, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like list_universities (listing) and compare_universities (comparison) by focusing on a single university's detailed profile.
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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (retrieve detailed profile for a specific university) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives. However, the sibling tool list and the specific contents make the usage scenario clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: answering questions, comparing universities, calculating ROI, fetching details, getting profiles, listing universities, matching schools, and searching. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names use snake_case and follow a verb_noun or noun_noun pattern, making them predictable. The only minor deviation is 'fetch', which is a single verb, but it's still clear and common for such operations.
8 tools is ideal for an education data server, covering core operations (search, list, profile, compare, ROI, etc.) without being overwhelming or insufficient.
The tool set covers main user needs: answering questions, searching and listing universities/schools, getting profiles and comparisons, and ROI calculations. Missing features like school comparison or data updates, but overall solid for a read-only knowledge base.