edubase_get_exam_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the specific behavior of returning a status that indicates whether new tests can start, which is useful context beyond the annotations. It does not contradict any annotation.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that leads with the verb and includes the key outcome. There is no wasted wording, and it is appropriately concise for a simple tool.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and an output schema present, the description is sufficient to guide an agent. It states the purpose and the specific information returned. The output schema handles return details, and annotations cover safety. The only minor gap is lack of explicit error-case behavior, but that is not critical here.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage for the single 'exam' parameter with the description 'exam identification string'. The tool description adds no additional meaning or format details beyond that. Since the schema fully documents the parameter, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Get'), resource ('status of an exam'), and the key semantic ('showing whether new tests can be started'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like edubase_get_exam (which likely retrieves full exam details) and edubase_post_exam_status (which modifies status).

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 implies the usage case: checking if new tests can be started. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use this instead of edubase_get_exam' or 'do not use if you need the full exam details'. Given the large set of exam-related siblings, explicit differentiation would help, but the implied usage is reasonably clear.

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