edubase_get_organization_compliance

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description uses its space well by adding the permission-scoped visibility rules and the enablement prerequisite — behavior annotations cannot express. It doesn't state what the response or error looks like when the prerequisite is unmet, but an output schema 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?

Three sentences, each doing distinct work: purpose+grouping first, then visibility scope, then precondition. No repetition 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?

With an output schema present and full parameter documentation, the description covers the remaining gaps an agent needs: permission-based result scoping and feature prerequisites. Only the failure mode when Library/competencies are disabled is left implicit.

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 both parameters are already documented. The description only restates that results 'can be limited to the members of a job role', adding no format or fallback detail beyond the schema's note about external identifiers.

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 ('Get the competency compliance overview of an organization') plus the grouping dimension ('grouped by departments'), which distinguishes it from siblings like edubase_get_organization_competencies and edubase_get_organization_competency_requirements.

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?

Explains the access model (organization reporters see every visible member, department leaders only their own departments) and the precondition that Library and competencies must be enabled. It does not name an alternative tool to use when that precondition fails, but the context for when the tool applies is clear.

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