get_student_profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds materially beyond them: it warns the response is sensitive PII returned verbatim, instructs keeping it in the student's own session, states login is required, and documents the NOT_AUTHENTICATED recovery sequence plus credential handling. This is exactly the extra operational context annotations cannot carry.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and the get_profile distinction, then privacy, then auth recovery — a sensible ordering. It is somewhat long, and the multi-step captcha/login/retry and env-var fallback detail is verbose for a no-arg reader, but each sentence carries actionable content.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned sections and the field categories (DOB, addresses, board/school, parents, proctor contact, hostel block/room). Combined with the auth-requirement and recovery flow, an agent has everything needed to call and handle the tool correctly.

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 (empty schema, 100% coverage), so there is nothing to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter meaning is present or needed.

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+resource (full student profile) and enumerates the exact content — the five accordion sections (personal, educational, family, proctor, hostel) with verbatim values. It also names what it excludes relative to the sibling get_profile (name/programme/branch/email/phone), so an agent can distinguish the two without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'Use this instead of get_profile when you need anything beyond name/programme/branch/email/phone', and lists the additional fields that justify the switch. It further specifies the auth recovery path (call get_captcha then login then retry on NOT_AUTHENTICATED) and the env-var/credential-prompt fallback, leaving nothing to inference.

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