Get current ClassDojo UI state

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

The readOnlyHint annotation covers the non-mutating nature, and the description reinforces this by saying it 'does not dismiss anything'. It adds specific behavioral details about the kinds of dialogs that might block the UI state, which is useful beyond the annotation. No contradiction exists.

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 sentences with high information density. The primary action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a clarifying negative. No redundant phrasing or filler.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should specify what the return value looks like (e.g., a status string or enumeration). It only says 'reports whether...' without detailing the output format. It also does not cover error scenarios or the meaning of the classId. This leaves the agent uncertain about the operation's result.

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 schema provides only the name, type, and minLength for classId, with no description. The description does not mention classId at all, so the agent receives no guidance on what the parameter means or how to obtain a valid value. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 uses the verb 'Reports' to indicate a read-only status operation on the selected class. It clearly enumerates the possible states (ready, adding students, or blocked) and explicitly states what it does not do (dismiss anything), which differentiates it from other ClassDojo tools that perform mutations.

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 context on when to use it: to check if a class is ready or blocked by a dialog. It also states an exclusion: it does not dismiss anything, implying a separate tool for dismissals. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, leaving some inference to the agent.

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