edubase_get_exam_round

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering safety. The description adds value by specifying the exact fields returned, which enriches the behavioral context without contradicting annotations. No side effects are mentioned but none are expected for a read operation.

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 concise sentences: the first states purpose and returns, the second points to the complementary sibling. No filler words, and the core purpose is front-loaded.

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 an output schema available, the return structure is documented externally. The description covers the purpose, the key data points, and the related mutation tool. It is complete for a simple getter, though it could briefly mention that the exam parameter refers to an existing exam ID.

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 100% coverage for the single 'exam' parameter with a description of 'exam identification string'. The tool description adds no further details about the parameter's format or how to obtain it, so it relies entirely on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states the action ('Get the current round of an exam') and enumerates the exact data returned (index, start time, results presence, frozen state). It also names the sibling tool for creating a new round, clearly distinguishing its purpose from edubase_post_exam_round.

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 implies when to use this tool (when you need the current round's status) and explicitly directs to edubase_post_exam_round for starting a new round. However, it does not contrast with other read-only exam tools like edubase_get_exam or edubase_get_exam_status, so some context on alternatives is missing.

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