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

Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive lookup. The description adds useful context: the record is public, includes a live vacancy count, and same-name schools are listed rather than silently resolved.

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 front-loaded with the resource and its scope, then moves to identification rules. The field enumeration is somewhat redundant with the output schema, but it remains efficient and useful for tool selection.

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 rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers what an agent needs: what the record contains, how to identify a school, how to disambiguate duplicates, and where slugs come from. Nothing material is missing 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that the slug can come from a job result or an EduAtlas URL, and by stating the slug-or-name-plus-country identification rule despite no required parameters.

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 and resource: 'The public record for one school on EduAtlas.' It enumerates the record's contents and its identification methods, making it unmistakably distinct from the job-search siblings.

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?

It clearly explains how to identify the school, preferring slug from a job result or URL, otherwise name plus country with an optional town. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the usage context is clear.

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